What comes after Communities Dominate Brands?

I was at FreemdomLab in Amsterdam today discussing the insights that are driving the profound changes that are currently reshaping our economic and social landscapes.

In our book we talk about the 4C's: Commerce, Culture, Community & Conectivity as a means to reliably map whether a commercial initiative will succeed or fail in todays world. We believe you need all 4.

I was asked, what comes next? The 2.0 question. And It was a good question.

My view is that, we are just about witnessing the dramatic reordering of the media industry, and in fact many other industries driven by the falling cost of technology, the fact we are a We species, and the fact that today we are all capable of creating and distributing, knowledge, information and culture.

So what next? The next is the reordering of Medicine – Education – and Politics. No aspect of what makes our civil society tick will be left untouched. Darwinism is upon us. Forcing us to adapt or die.

The conversations I have had with many organisations over the last 18 months and particuarly the last 12, outline for me how fraught, and painful that transition is. As someone once said

I embrace progress, I just hate change

It wont happen tomorrow, or the day after. But we can see, already the grassroots of that change.

Engagement as we call it defines a very different approach.

Transparency, co-creation, participation, harnessing collective intelligence, authenticity and trust are all part of the langugae and equation. Its not a tweak of the old industrial model. Its a fundamental reshaping of how we will live in the very near future.

And as we say, Once you have stormed the Bastille, you don't go back to your boring day job. In this instance your boring day job is the consumer (economic value x$) who is unconnected, passive, & ignorent who will happily consume whatever is put in front of them. But equally the day job reflects how we secure a healthy future, how we better educate our children and how we can all once again re-engage with the debate of the type of society we would like to live in via political debate.

For example, in a comment leader in the Guardian today Madeline Bunting observes and asks a question...

Art is not about the simple certainties of political soundbites. It engages emotionally, prompting a self-questioning. There is no predetermined answer. As Gormley puts it: "The beholder has a share in the giving of significance to a work." The passer-by can interpret Gormley's figures on the skyline just as the art critic and the artist can: art is about opening up conversations and connections in a myriad of ways, even between strangers on the street who share their delight - or contempt.

In contrast, politics has been professionalised and managed down to the last detail. There is no room for risk. A Radio 4 Today interview is often about testing out the political skills of evasion and unflappability. We are not being provoked to reflect, but to witness a gladiatorial contest of wits. The consequence is that some of the most fraught political controversies of our time are migrating into art. In the case of Mark Wallinger's State Britain, this is literally true. One of the entries on this year's Turner prize shortlist - which is billed as the most political ever - State Britain is a re-assembly of more than 600 of the posters and objects of the anti-war protester Brian Hawes that were forcibly removed from Parliament Square in 2006. Now they're sitting in an art gallery.

Has art replaced the artful politician in challenging our sense of ourselves and the role we all have to play in our post modern world? Realistically, if we all stop voting, who will decide those that should be elected representatives of the people?

We are currently working on a couple of projects, which I believe will profoundly change the relationship between economic enterprises and their customers. Based upon our book and the insights and learnings we have garnered since publishing the book in 2005.

Within the some 300,000 words we have written on this blog is the groundwork and the testament of what that looks like and what that means for us all.

I like being asked what's next, even if it makes my head hurt.

Comments

[Jörgen]

Always good, to share thoughts with the like minded, it was a great conversation ;-)

Interesting that you picked those three area's in which you think a profound change (?) will occur next. As they all have to do with the transformation of the individual: in medicine individuals (clients, users, or however you want to call them) transform from sick to healthy, in education people change from ignorant to knowing. And in politics beliefs are transformed into actions (or perhaps that's what it should be about). In any case in either of those three markets (?) it's about changing the individual. Or the ultimate experience: one that is everlasting, memorable; one that truly reaches deep inside us and actually change us.

In that respect, I think that the ultimate engagement might not (just) be about creating an experience, but about creating a transformation? Is transformation of the individual the last stop in 'creating engagement'? Does the same apply to communities? Is it possible to create a transformation within a community, or transform the community itself? Or is a transformation economy inherently an individual thing and will it lead to the decrease of the power of communities?

[David Cushman]

Right on the money as always Alan. The transformation of politics seems inevitable to me.
Small examples are already with us. myfootballclub.co.uk lets everyone have their say in selection of a club to own and in the running of that club.
How long until MyTownCouncil emerges?
How long before we finally get to implement what trial by jury was always meant to be about?

[Alan moore]

Dear Jörgen,

Thanks for your comments. Transformation - The three areas I mentioned need transformation, and we have the tools previously not available to us, or even the correct mental models to enable us to deploy transformational solutions.

I had not previously conciously thought about transformation in this way, but I think all along it was implicit in my thinking.

When I talk about the American Idol for example where in the 2nd series 30% of mobile texting voters had never sent a text message before. I ask then the question – How does one change peoples behaviour around, in this instance technology?

So yes then the question can you affect, create a transformation within a community and the answer is yes.

I am not sure about you're last point, because we can transform as individuals and we can transform as a community. Both are independent from eachother, but both need eachother.

Community, ultimately is a sub-set of civil society, it is a more manageable size, whether thats Sneakerplay, Current TV, World of Warcraft, our local village or the village football club.

So engagement = the possibility of transformation

Thanks for posing the question.

Alan :-)

[Raimo van der Klein]

Hi Alan, Nice post..What IS next?

The biggest thing I currently see is that all structures(parts put together) in all forms are crumbling and transforming into individual small purposefull pieces. Basically this is a change from Reductionistic thinking to Holistic thinking. This holistic thinking drives to answer WHY questions. Giving meaning to us, our products and the planet. Transforming to a world where structures are creating on a just by purpose basis(Ahocracy). A world that changes solely on the communicated wishes of individuals and groups..

[Raimo van der Klein]

(without so many mistakes)
Hi Alan, Nice post..What IS next?

The biggest thing I currently see is that all structures(parts put together) in all forms are crumbling and transforming into individual small purposeful pieces. Basically this is a change from Reductionistic(parts) thinking to Holistic(whole) thinking. This holistic thinking drives us to answer WHY questions. Giving meaning to us, our products and the planet. Transforming into a world where structures are created organically on a just by purpose basis(Adhocracy). A world that changes solely on the communicated wishes of individuals and groups..

[Alan moore]

Raimo,

Thanks for such a considered response. My take out from your words is that networked societies have the means to affect and effect change. Or as Jörgen would say transformation.

Elected body politics, and organisations, are all built on the heireachical model of industrial processes which do not allow an indiviual a voice in that process. As much as those incumbent organisations would argue otherwise.

Today, we can have a voice and we can play a meaningful part in that process, if we so choose and desire to do so.

Reductionist vs. Holistic.

The idea of group forming networks extrapolates this theory, and negates the role of conventional institutions or even governments and oveturns the idea of even countries.

For Northern Europeans for example, our stories and culture are dramatically altered by immigration. For me the Second World War plays a defining role in my identity as an Englishman and what it means to be English. However, there are many people now that cannot define their identity through this history. I don't mourn such a loss, I just observe that today its different.

The story of immigration – what role do immigrants play and how do they shap their identities in a post modern world in their adpoted countries. Think of the Dutch story told through the book Infidel.

Where is the voice for these people, and how do they become part of the body politic? They must become part of civial society and the democratic process.

Witness the riots in Paris in 2005 - this was a community which was frustrated in its seemingly endless existence at the frayed edges of French civial society.

How do we give them "a world that changes solely on the communicated wishes of individuals and groups?"

Not by locking them out.

Alan

[Raimo van der Klein]

Hi again,

My hope is that transparancy and connectiveness make the process of locking in or our irrelevant. There is no means to lock-in or out..

Bytheway next time you visit Amsterdam let's try to meet :-)

Raimo