March 11, 2009

It’s easy to decouple the producer from the good and services that they produce. But, in our modern times, it is also easy to add transparency to production and change the way we think about the people who make and implement the stuff that we use.

Crowdsourcing takes this decoupling to the extreme. A couple of years ago it seemed that some thought crowdsourcing, the process of outsourcing work to a community was supposed to be the answer to all the worlds’ problems. In a world where people just want to get stuff done, crowdsourcing provides easy answers. Entire companies like Innocentive and Innovation Exchange seek to anonymize production of business strategies and science. A full spectrum of crowdsourcing has emerged. Firms outsource everything from bit tasks to full-on innovation programs. Some of these enterprises reward individuals for creativity, others don’t. Small firms specialize solely on consulting regarding crowdsourcing strategies.

People talked about this wave of web-based crowdsourcing like it was brand new, but there is a long tradition of doling out work to a larger community. My favorite historical example is that of alcohol bootlegging processes during prohibition. Bootleggers used to pay families to participate in bit parts of alcohol production, thereby mitigating some of the legal risks associated with a centralized illegal operation.

Crowdsourcing tends to emphasize the anonymity of production. Managers think, “Anyone can do the work, right?” This approach is at once powerful and limiting. For more menial tasks, it allows businesses to have Bob23490 do the work, without needing to have any deep relationship with Bob23940. That can be a good thing or a bad thing.

But what about outsourcing to a community where the individual is valued as an individual? The mental and technological tools that make crowdsourcing a reality can also make distributed production possible or better.

Golden Hook is a customized hat company. Golden Hook’s hats are made by French grandmothers. You pick your hat template, pick your colors and size, and then you pick your French Grandma of choice. The presentation is whimsical. This isn’t a pity party. This is a high-end hat produced by craftswomen. Perhaps Golden Hook is a co-op. But this seems different than most co-ops that I have encountered.

The mode of production is an impetus to purchase. The fact that production isn’t anonymous, like it is with most hats, provides the buyer with a sense of authenticity and perhaps a sense of social responsibility. Manufacture is outsourced — and this is celebrated and marketed.

Is it possible for larger firms to look at the advantages of crowdsourcing — distributed production, low risk, and low-cost — and think about ways to forge mutually beneficial relationships with external partners? I think there are plenty of opportunities outside the world of French hats.

In an increasingly digital world, its no wonder that some are clamoring for authenticity like never before. Ziba Design has turned authenticity into a mantra, working with brands to reach their authentic potential. So to have the makers of the Heat Surge, who apparently leverage the authentic skills of Amish craftsmen for the production of their electric heater mantles.

Some companies necessarily distribute large parts of their work to third parties. I once consulted for a very large technology firm that relies on resellers to get their product into the hands of small businesses.

It wasn’t in the original design brief, but I ended up working with this company to rethink their relationship with their resellers. Resellers had been anonymized and they were getting frustrated. This company’s processes didn’t leave the resellers feeling like they were valued.  This firm was anonymizing producers and in the process marginalizing them.

I got them to evolve their thinking — to start thinking about ways to celebrate individuals and reward good performers. Part of the innovation was in thinking about how to connect the right customers with the right partners. The fruits of this labor are starting to show now.

What if more companies took a lesson from Golden Hook? What if companies like it treated their resellers as symbiotic partners rather than anonymous pipelines?

It’s an interesting thought exercise to think about where the Golden Hook approach can go. Are there new ways for people to monetize their hobbies? Is this a solution to our economic woes? Maybe it is.

March 3, 2009

One of my favorite design techniques is something I call “inversion”. I try to decouple the engrained associations with the thing I’m designing. This process requires an acknowledge that not all things have a fixity of meaning. Some of are associations deeply engrained in permanent truths, but other associations are just waiting to be changed.

The way things are is not always the way they must be.

I’ve been thinking about libraries through this lens. My interest was heightened when I found myself in a discussion with someone who believed that it was time to shut down many of our libraries and divert that money into computing technology for children. I disagreed, and I still do. But it is an interesting provocation. 

How can libraries achieve or maintain relevance in the age of cheap laptops and ever-expanding connectivity? How can the physical space of the library evolve when some of the knowledge that it holds is available for download?

I’ve been thinking about what a library is — and what a library can be. We are trained to know what a library is and is not at young age. But times change, and I’ll gamble to say that libraries will need to change as well especially in turbulent economic times.

Clearly some libraries are evolving to fit current needs. I know about fantastic mega-spaces like the Danish Royal Library and the Seattle Public Library Central Library. Both these buildings push the architechtural limits and make libraries “extreme places”.

Danish Royal Library, by flickr user sftrajan

Danish Royal Library, by flickr user sftrajan


I started this post out by talking about inversion. These extreme libraries are fascinating monuments that invert expectations. But aren’t there other ways to invert expectations without the $100+ million budgets?

I did some searching and found that some libraries are inverting on a budget. Some are creating collaboration stations, large desks equiped with giant monitors for shared work. 

But the most exciting example of inversion that I found was the simplest. It was also in my fair city.

San Francisco’s Mission Bay Branch Library inverted expectations about branch libraries with one simple change. Libararies are quiet, right? Well at the Mission Bay Branch there is apparently a quiet room. The rest of the library encourages discussion. The library can become a third place of the 21st century. This library features speakers and children’s yoga.

There’s no telling what other opportunities will be borne out of this type of simple inversion.

March 2, 2009
I’m writing as I fly over Nevada, in route to San Francisco after a weekend in Chicago. I’ve had my laptop out for much of the flight, but, until now I’ve been using it as an 5 pound aluminum battery for my iPhone. I just was listening to the BBC Digital Planet podcast. Much of the podcast was dedicated to covering the Mobile World Congress (MWC).
Kevin Spacey was hosting a mobile film awards showat MWC sounded more in touch with mobile media behaviors than the BBC journalists…who themselves are podcasters. How odd.
The journalist interviewing Spacey seemed shocked and appalled by the prospect of using mobile devices to view media. He asked Spacey if he thought that people can really produce entertaining media on a mobile device. In the interview, Spacey forecasts a world in five years where we’ll be watching videos on our mobile phones.
I’m pretty sure we don’t need to wait five years to see our mobile devices transform into media players. Just look around. And I’m also pretty sure that people can produce entertaining media specifically for phones. Mobile media may be “new”, but there is no reason to treat mobile devices as enigmatic. Otherwise we’ll miss the opportunities right under noses.

I’m writing as I fly over Nevada, in route to San Francisco after a weekend in Chicago. I’ve had my laptop out for much of the flight, but, until now I’ve been using it as an 5 pound aluminum battery for my iPhone. I just was listening to the BBC Digital Planet podcast. Much of the podcast was dedicated to covering the Mobile World Congress (MWC).

Kevin Spacey was hosting a mobile film awards showat MWC sounded more in touch with mobile media behaviors than the BBC journalists…who themselves are podcasters. How odd.

The journalist interviewing Spacey seemed shocked and appalled by the prospect of using mobile devices to view media. He asked Spacey if he thought that people can really produce entertaining media on a mobile device. In the interview, Spacey forecasts a world in five years where we’ll be watching videos on our mobile phones.

I’m pretty sure we don’t need to wait five years to see our mobile devices transform into media players. Just look around. And I’m also pretty sure that people can produce entertaining media specifically for phones. Mobile media may be “new”, but there is no reason to treat mobile devices as enigmatic. Otherwise we’ll miss the opportunities right under noses.

December 3, 2008

Three months ago I decided it would be a good idea to set up a personal blog. I had an initial spurt of contributions but over time those contributions trailed off. Was it because I had less to share? Not really.

My problem was that I stuggled with the idea of one bucket for everything I wanted to share. The things I wanted to share weren’t always congruous. A long article seemed strange next to a screenshot. An extended analysis seems strange when interspersed with picture of cool workspaces and new gadgets.

So, my solution, far from revolutionary, is to break out the things that I would like to share to a range of blogs. If you’ve gotten this far, you’ve probably figured out how this all works. As my interests evolve I’ll probably add more blogs. But for now the following blogs are available from the front page of my site.

Democracy - An attempt to document activities and technologies that empower people in their relationships with governments. My interest in this topic was revived during the past election season.

Found - A catalog of interesting stuff I find on the web or in the real world. Sometimes I’ll explain what I’m thinking but sometimes you’ll have to guess. This will be the most frequently updated blog.

Insights - A deeper look at what I’m thinking about.

Telemedicine - I’ve got a new interest in this topic. I’m trying to catalog as many concepts/products as I can as I establish my point of view on the topic

Soon, the Workplace blog will be active. I will collect significant examples where new processes and technologies are improving innovation and collaboration.

September 12, 2008
 
I don’t know how I missed this…but Jamie Wilkinson taught/is teaching a course at Parsons called “Internet Famous”. Students are graded on their ability to generate interest in their works online. But the course is really about teaching art students how to market themselves and stand out when anyone with web access can start a meme…an undeniably important skill.
This course lies in sharp contrast to an ethos I was recently told of from a professor at CMU. His view was that students shouldn’t get too much attention from the outside world. To him the work that happened at the university should stay inside the university. He wasn’t interested in seeing students garner media attention. I’m pretty sure Jamie holds the exact opposite point of view.

I don’t know how I missed this…but Jamie Wilkinson taught/is teaching a course at Parsons called “Internet Famous”. Students are graded on their ability to generate interest in their works online. But the course is really about teaching art students how to market themselves and stand out when anyone with web access can start a meme…an undeniably important skill.

This course lies in sharp contrast to an ethos I was recently told of from a professor at CMU. His view was that students shouldn’t get too much attention from the outside world. To him the work that happened at the university should stay inside the university. He wasn’t interested in seeing students garner media attention. I’m pretty sure Jamie holds the exact opposite point of view.

September 10, 2008

Blind Reviewing

I’ve already my outlined my point of view on online reviews — flaws in review-based systems are starting to become evident and we need to think about ways to design to match new reviewing behaviors.

One flaw in reviews is the phenomenon of blind reviewing. Blind reviewing occurs when someone posts a review about something they don’t actually have any experience with. Sometimes this is malicious, sometimes its not.

This is especially common when posting a review is the only way to share information on a site. The other day I was looking a restaurant review on Yelp. 35 people had reviewed the restaurant well, but the most recent reviewer decided to give the restaurant 3/5 stars, since the restaurant was closed for the month when she went.

That is useful information, and it saved me some disappointment, but her review is just one of many written by people that haven’t experienced the things they are reviewing. When I was in Austin recently, I almost went to a restaurant based on positive Yelp average reviews. Turns out most of the reviews were for a nice bartender that reviewers knew socially….most of the reviewers had never actually dined there.

All this may seem minor, but when reviews are on a five point scale, every rating counts in terms of search result placement.

The solution:
Let people submit “Tips” — Let them add valuable information to sites without forcing them to make a review. Introduce new content types (e.g. Tips) that allow users to add valuable information. Display this information differently and create a Wikipedia-esque/Digg-like culture of collaboration. Give users the opportunity to agree or disagree.  This encourages further submission of valuable content, adds clarity to reviews, and gives people something to do once they’ve already reviewed something.

Amazon has started to tackle this problem, but the execution is complex and probably not a good model to work from. Keep it simple and I think good things will come of this direction.

September 9, 2008

On reviews

The opinions of millions of regular people are more accessible than ever before. Reviews are particularly interesting to me, in part because so many of my decisions in my life are now affected by them. I read books based on what people say on GoodReads or Amazon. I eat at restaurants if they get great reviews on Yelp. I watch movies and TV shows based on Netflix reviews. Rotten Tomatoes has guided me plenty of times (though the critics were dead wrong about Transsiberian being good). I stay at hotels because they are rated well on TripAdvisor. Reviews have have a significant sway over me, and, based on the popularity of the aforementioned sites, I don’t think I’m alone.

4 Star Hat

I’ve been able to rely on these reviews to discover some great things…and I’ve been thrilled to design a bunch of products that utilize user-generated reviews and ratings. But I can’t help but think it’s time to step back and look at some of the flaws out there.

The wisdom of crowds (if that really exists in the way it has been hyped) has been muddled by poor design. We need to be learning from the behaviors that people have adopted and evolve the mechanisms by which people share their opinions.

September 6, 2008

Event Listings, yr doing it wrong

Sitting on my hotel balcony in LA, looking out at the city and haze I couldn’t help but wonder what was going on in it.

We’re 13 years into mass access of the web but, unless I’m missing something, there’s still no great way to get comprehensive multi-city event information in one place. When I say events I mean a range of events — museums to concerts to street fairs. Its incredible how so often the traditional printed media beats the smattering of upstarts trying to play in this space. There are a few reasons for this:

Metadata is essential
How much are tickets? Where can I buy them? How many nights is this event? Why should I care about this event? Human editors are good at compiling this information search algorithms are not. Services like Eventful suffer because of this.

The web encourages niches
There is no single Source of event trurh online. The nerd leaning use Upcoming. Music fans use Sonic Living. I don’t know who uses Flavorpill. Yelpers use Yelp.

Editorial voices make events interesting
Listings aren’t fun to read on their own. Almost every listings site tries to spice up listings with comment threads but those comments ars usually are along the lines of “can’t wait”. There are far better ways to get visitors to share higher value insights (I have a bunch of ideas here if anyone wants to talk more about this).

September 2, 2008

Now Playing

There are many apps in iPhone App Store, but there are only a couple that have integrated directly into my life. One is called “Now Playing”. Now Playing is a great example of how lowered barriers to creation can really benefit consumers. It’s also a example of how an individual can create world class services better than those provided by large corporations.

jordankanarek.com 

The feature list (from the project’s Google Code site) is amazing — and usually the stuff of fantasy for people tasked with developing ‘convergent’ products. And remember it was done by one guy, with a little bit of help. The app can:

  • check rating and reviews from RottenTomatoes and Metacritic
  • order tickets directly from participating theaters
  • play trailers with a single click
  • check out what’s playing at your favorite theater
  • keep movie and theater information on your iPhone, even without a network connection

Interested learning the behind the story of this great app I asked Now Playing’s developer, Cyrus Najmabadi, a few questions over email. Cyrus has spent about 240 hours building and maintaining the application, with visual design and translation from 10 volunteers. He’s got one of the best apps in the App Store, he’s had some interesting legal run-ins with Apple, and he’s sharp.

Me: You’ve had some issues with Apple removing your application from the App Store. After this experience think Apple have too much control over their store? Is there anything you’d like to see changed in the relationship between Apple and developers?
Cyrus: I appreciate that Apple has provided developers with teh store, and i feel that the 30% they take is a fair cut.  After all, they provide a friendly and convenient place for users to find apps, a uniform reviewing mechanism, pirating protection, automatic updates, and a whole host of other features.  That said, i think it’s rather draconian to *only* allow users to get apps through the store, and to *only* allow devs to distribute through the store.

If I want to distribute apps on my own I feel I should be allowed to do so.  I realize that by doing that I will give [up] a whole host of features (like free advertising, automatic update notifications, etc.).  However, I still feel the choice should be up to me and not Apple.Me: Now Playing is free. There’s probably a huge opportunity to monetize the app as hundreds of millions of dollars are transacted around films every day. Are you currently collecting affiliate revenues from ticket sales? Have people in the industry contacted you about sponsorship, paid placement, etc?Cyrus: I’ve gotten lots of offers, but so far nothing has really interested me.  First, i didn’t get in this to make money, so i’m not really looking for ways to monetize the app.  There is a donate button, but that’s more about just recouping the cost of becoming an app developer, buying the phone, and keeping me awake with coffee as i improve the app.  That seems like a fair exchange to me : - )   Second, these kind of agreements often come with restrictions and caveats that i’m not comfortable with (like exclusivity).  I feel that the restrictions will end up hurting my customers more than the affiliate relationship will help.  Finally, things like ‘ads’ absolutely drive me nuts.  On a device the size of the iPhone it’s just too intrusive.  I don’t like it, so I don’t want to put my users through it.
Me: Do you have any interest in developing for Android? Perhaps a port Now Playing? Is there anything you like about the Android platform above the iPhone?
Cyrus: Absolutely!  I’d also like to mention that Now Playing is Free and Open Source project.  I wrote it that way so that it could be continually improved by the community.  That improvement could come in the form of new features, or in the form of ports to different platforms.  For example, i’ve gotten people who’ve offered to port this to the Crackberry.  That’s terrific.  I don’t have a BB, nor am i really interested in getting one.  But thanks to other passionate developers, there’s no reason that BB users can’t enjoy this app as well.

Localization has also come from community efforts.  Now Playing has been localized into 9 languages (with more on the way!) thanks to the volunteer efforts of the community.

August 28, 2008

Don’t Pull That Pirated Video

Imagine that you’re a network executive. 30 million people are trying to watch a clip of your hit show on YouTube. Your knee-jerk reaction one year ago? Have legal send YouTube a cease and desist.  But times appear to be changing. Google’s Video ID partners (a self selecting crew, no doubt) are reportedly deciding to monetize their pirated content 90% of the time by sharing in the ad revenue with Google. This seems like a no-brainer decision when you step back and look at it, but the path to this point was probably long and tumultous. This is a monetary win for Google and content owners, and a major experience boost  for the average viewer who just wants to see that video everyone has been talking about.

Google Blog

next