Entrepreneurs get networked up to and across each other

May 13th, 2010

Got a great business idea but no money to finance it? It’s the age old problem faced by would-be entrepreneurs. But a new generation of online funding platforms is taking the pain out of raising capital to get new ventures off the ground.

Writes the BBC in Cash-strapped entrepreneurs get creative. GrowVC is mentioned, founded in February by Jouko Ahvenainen and Valto Loikkanen,  describes itself as the first global crowdfunding tool for web and mobile start-ups. Through the site, start-ups can secure initial funding ranging from $10,000 to $1m. The site has 2,500 registered users in 108 countries worldwide. Some 25% of Grow VC users are in the US, 11% in the UK and 7% in India.TechCrunch called it the Kiva of startups (more here). The total capital raised through the site so far is $12.8m.

And there is a real need for this as the reality is that orthodox VC funding delivers poor deal flow, based on local/personal networks with lack of proper information and tools. The next Silicon Valley is not a location, it is a platform and community online, where together entrepreneurs, Business Angels and Institutional Investors are connected up to and across each other. It’s got other good stuff going for it as well: a transparent global market place and the tools to find companies, make investments and manage investments.  and even has open API’s allowing others to develop applications and services, therefore, open to develop new funding and business models. Its grassroots and looks to set a precedent for future funding models.

The BBC report also reports

Along with professional investors, a growing number of ordinary people with an interest in investing have been logging on to Grow VC.Petra Soderling heard about Grow VC on Twitter and is making the minimum Grow VC investment of $20 a month. For me it’s about investing and hoping to see a profit but also about using a small amount of money to help small companies.



A requiem for Detroit

May 13th, 2010

I became aware of the plight of Detroit through my research into Local Motors. I used Detroit in my sxsw presentation to highlight what happens when we cannot build adaptation, into business systems, into regions – this is the toxic legacy of the industrial revolution. This film takes us on a sad journey and is a salutatory lesson, especially for working out what comes next? My question is how do we build lightweight, adaptive, flexible, effective real-world organisations and businesses, that can perform in unprecedented ways, plus input costs dramatically reduced when we re-engineer business systems? What happens when we put humanity into the economic mix – do we become romantic economists? How does that impact on the quality of life as well affecting regional development, inward investment and job creation? More (here) and (here). Detroit did not have open source, or open api’s, it was a closed system. As Neil Young sang, its easy to get stuck in the past when you are trying to make a good thing last.

In Natural Capitalism, (a book that has a great deal going for it) the authors write,

Capitalism, as practised is a financially profitable, nonsustainable aberration in human development. What might be called “industrial capitalism” does not fully conform to its own accounting principals. It liquidates its capital and calls it income. It neglects to assign any value to the largest stocks of capital it employs – the natural resources and living systems, as well as the social and cultural systems that are the basis of human capital.

I give you Detroit…

Selling in the networked economy @ Cambridge Network

May 13th, 2010

Last night I motorcycled over to Redgate Software on the Cambridge Business Park to speak at the Cambridge Network event, so thank you Matt from Cambridge Network for inviting me along, on Selling in the Networked Economy. Well, the official title was selling in social media – but I do struggle with that term. I was also joined by the lovely Oliver Kern from Cambridge gaming company Jagex.

I think some 60 people turned up, and in evolved into quite a fascinating discussion. My point, that we are on a journey that challenges the fixed orthodoxies of what is business in a networked context, some of the points covered…

[1] What makes you so special as a business – what enabling thing to you bring into this world?  [2] What are the assets available inside an organisation – where does sales stop and start – I used the example of Zappos streaming internal meetings – greater insight into an organisation = more trust?   [3] Is your audience hyper-local or super-global?   [4] How does co-creation, co-innovation, and even co-determination enable a company to be more commercially successful? Indeed – do you have a). consumers, b). customers, c). an audience or d). a passionate community that plays a key role in advocating your business? I used Lego as a case history here  [5] Data and open api’s were also discussed – how even from being open with IP – technology and data or harnessing the data flows of others could that bring greater leverage – I used the example of GrowVC and a few others, such as Local Motors (here).   [6] Business engineering for speed, reduction of cash burn, reach and attraction of the people with whom you would like to engage is also a part of this paradigm   [7] revenue models which incentives’ real engagement, and commitment to deliver the best creativity – such as Threadless.

My point being that this thing, that many like to call social media – is a bigger more important story (here), (here), (here).

In the Q&A – I was asked a question concerning a recent CBI report on the days that are lost by business because so many people have their faces stuck into all that nonsense called social media. My response which ended up being quite impassioned was yes, this report is typical, when in fact for many people they would say modern life is literally killing them. What is the nature of work in the networked society? But the Anglo-Saxon has a cold glinty heart. I made the point that the above 7 points could deliver an entirely different process of enabling Britain to deal with its crushing debt, and build a faster, leaner, smarter, more competitive Britain at the same time.


The fairness in economics

May 11th, 2010

Ernst Fehr on compassion in economics,

Twenty years ago, Fehr had a seemingly sensible idea – that a deep-seated human preference for fairness might play an important role in economics.

Fairness and Reciprocity

Entrepreneurship in the networked society by John Seely Brown

April 29th, 2010

Following on from yesterday’s post on the evolution of media/publishing etc., inspired by Alan Rusbridger speaking at the Law firm Olswang

I came across a great address that John Seely Brown gave at Stanford’s Technology and Ventures Program. For the networked society deniers, there is a pattern that emerges. Something that I covered in Industrial slash and burn or the no straight lines of possibility.

This pattern ushers in the notion of “velocity” – the ability to move and travel, intellectually and commercially at speeds which were up unto recently unprecedented – to get things done, to gather, aggregate and share information that were previously thought impossible. Lightweight infrastructure, networked in the cloud, buy as you go – all alter how entrepreneurs will engage with funding in the future.

These new models of entrepreneurship, says Seely, are built upon also the human talents of deep listening, recipricocity and embedded trust in networked knowledge flows. Which reminds of a number of posts I made called Commonwealth in the Networked Economy (here) (here) (here). Seely describes for me the No Straight Lines of entrepreneurship in the early 21st Century.

Alan Rusbridger: 21st Century publishing @ Olswang

April 28th, 2010

I went along last night to listen to Alan Rusbridger present at Olswangs Technology+ event. A packed room, listened attentively to what he had to say. The word he used for the future of the Guardian was mutalisation: whereby value is built over time through a two-way participatory approach with the wider world. The deconstruction if you will of the Berlin Wall of expert vs. amateur, or the organisation and the social environment it exists in. We were taken though online examples of mass niche communities of interest, that functioned as participatory communities in a variety of industries, including a favourite of mine ProPublica, (post on propublica). Alan also quoted Jeff Jarvis who advised the Guardian that they should do what they do best and link to the rest. Of course the linking is the capability to write a statement, or express a point of view based upon another source and hyperlink to that source hence creating a story or narrative web rather than a piece of writing that exists isolated, unfindable and undiscoverable – ergo has no value or limited value. Alan pointed out that we have gone from Monotype to Digg. Jarvis likes to say the value is in the links, what he means is that through linking one can become more findable, audiences build and the experience richer, the work becomes more contextually relevant to the information network that we have built.

I asked Alan the question as what he thought the deeper forces were that drive this quiet revolution towards mutuality. As in many ways, the presentation was a more mechanical description/observation on how this all worked. You can’t win – but I had to ask the question, as I believe that for many, the reasons we are in transition from one type of economy/society to another is central to understanding what comes next, and how to get there.

Which led onto other questions from the floor like, why would I buy your paper when I can get it for free online? and I feel uncomfortable that you are working with “non-expert journalists” surely this dissolves your authority and value? Or, I am canceling my Guardian subscription Rupert Murdoch has got to be right? Fascinating, because of the linear/industrial assumption of status conferred by title, authority assumed by some and taken away from others (all very hierarchical) – whereas Alan Rusbridger argued that the true skill of his journalists is in curation, aggregating and interpreting – and I think that is right. On the topic of co-evolved consumers as Kevin Kelly called them, I would prefer to think that citizen journalism in some ways relates to Richard Sennett’s idea about Craftsmanship. But I did get the sense that quite a few people in that room were at the early stages of the journey of understanding the full consequences of living and working in the network society. As Clay Shirkey wrote, Revolutions create a curious inversion of perception. This open platform approach to journalism and newsbrands that relates to the Guardian one can (read more here). And there was a very relevant question raised about data, its uses and implications form an ethical and legal perspective.

In Currency of information: the future of newspapers, I quoted Alan who wrote The future of newspapers is a bit like climate change: there are now far fewer ‘old-media’ deniers. Indeed, as its only when companies start to hemorrhage cash quarterly, and when the FO has done all cutting, in some instance through the bone that they say, OK what is it I need to do? I truly admire the Guardian, as they have consistently worked at evolving what it means to be a valued newsbrand in the networked society, and I equally admire Alan Rusbridger as editor of that newspaper, as under his stewardship the Guardian has responded to the challenges that were apparent some time ago. He did point out the journey for the Guardian has not been all plain sailing (reading between the lines here) but through dialogue internally and engaging in the debate – progress has been made, and continues to do so.

The project for Excellence in Journalism report stated

If older media sectors focus on profit-taking and stock price, they may do so at the expense of building the new technologies that are vital to the future. There are signs that that may be occurring.

what do we take from the old to combine with the new?

The only way to save journalism is to develop a new model that finds profit in truth, vigilance, and social responsibility,” Phil Meyer said.

That dull phrase, “new model,” includes stuff that is not dull at all. Like a different kind of company to work for, a better sense of how journalists can create value on the Web, a new and deeper commitment to interactivity with users as a way to do more kick-ass reporting.

My view is this, its not that the decline of the mass media (here) businesses could be completely averted, however, these companies could have been in a far better position to face a market place defined by what I call networked economics. Instead, these boards have attempted to squeeze more efficiency from the thinning value of their current business models. Though it would be a brave CEO to stand up and say, we are fucked, lets rethink our business model, for the simple reason that she or he – the CEO must talk up his or her business to the media, shareholders and analysts, and harvest the cash-flow for the quarterly numbers. The whole-scale tragedy is eventually failure to act in a timely fashion means that the road crash at the end is that more; final and ugly – for everyone. Lost jobs, lost lives, and a big black-hole for institutional investors wondering how they will ever get their pension funds back. The research findings from Communities Dominate Brands published in 2005 lead us to conclude that it is about: Connectivity, Culture, Community and Commerce. You can’t separate these anymore, without failing commercially.

The key points are in my humble opinion that:

[1] We live in a Read & Write culture

[2] We live in a participatory culture

[3] We live in a search economy and a semantic universe and refined data transforms how brands and people can find each other in more meaningful ways

[4] We live in the networked society Which also encompasses the glittering allure of the mobile society

This transformation Yochai Benkler argued is structural – challenging how businesses and markets will co-evolve over the oncoming decades.

[5] The networked society and the Read & Write culture dramatically alter the power relationships between society the media, and organisations.

“In the age of mass media, the press was able to define the sphere of legitimate debate with relative ease because the people on the receiving end were atomised  but connected ‘up’ to Big Media, but not, across to each other, and now that authority is eroding”, says Journalism Professor Jay Rosen

[6] That communication technology is political

Communication power, says Manuel Castells is at the heart of the structure and dynamics of society. By which he means, who has and who wields that power, can transform society. Communication technology is at the very heart of this current transformation of society – because we are seeking meaningful communication with each other, something that traditional media has failed to grasp, or crassly deployed it via Pop Idol and the X-Factor. The reality is that there there are consequences to this evolution.

[7] That interruptive, display, and image advertising is the junk mail of the 21st Century.

[8] There is no online and offline, there is no analogue vs. digital there is only blended reality – the crisis comes when there is no connectivity. Business models must reflect that fact. This also has implications for how organisations construct themselves.

[9] The language and therefore the literacy that defines this networked society is different to the straight line, siloed, industrial mass media, mass consumer language and literacy.

[10] Business value is defined by (a) being: life-enabling, life-simplifying and navigational (help me navigate through the complexity of my life), (b) business models are hybrid, (c) the 4C’s: commerce, culture, community, connectivity.

SMLXL archives on newspapers, newsbrands

The life and death of democracy in the networked society

April 27th, 2010

John Keane, has produced something of a landmark text – its scope defies imagination. Taking us through the myriad journeys democracy has undertaken to exist in its present form – Keane also recognises how networked communication puts us within in a context that is unprecedented.

My interest in his work, is that communication technologies are political and can be wielded with great power – Politics as a consequence has become viral, even visceral, which implies that traditional frameworks of governance have become somewhat outdated, and ineffectual. Therefore Keane concludes, in the age of networked communications, combined with organisations that are constantly monitoring the motives and actions of various powerful parties, ‘combine into something of a Gestalt switch’ which makes us think differently about how we perceive power and who wields it’. And what does that mean for Britain? Here are a few thoughts.

Here he introduces us to The Life and Death of Democracy.

Language for a networked world

April 23rd, 2010

I presented this slide at the Figaro Digital Conference yesterday

It’s a work in progress, but explores what the language of the world of No Straight Lines

Thanks to everyone for coming along

and thank you for everyone at Figaro for inviting me

The language of No Straight Lines

Alan speaking @ sxsw podcast

April 20th, 2010

Click here to listen to my presentation @sxsw

The digital you: identity and privacy in the networked society

April 10th, 2010

Here is a concise 5minute presentation I gave at Mashup recently. Thanks to the guys (Tony and Simon) for inviting me, it was certainly an interesting and stimulating evening. Not that I was surprised, but, by the time all presenters had finished their 5mins and the Q&A started the temperature in the room had quietly gone through the roof – no shouting, or expletives used. But the notion of ones identity really pushes some big buttons for people. Again not surprising, but I wonder if we are exploiting that sensitivity in a political and civic sense in the way that we all should?

Alan Moore’s Keynote from the Digital Identity: How valuable is the digital you? event from Simon Grice on Vimeo.