In my last post I talked about how all media is social. Before I get to my examples in the next few days, I want to talk about the implications of these changes on institutions. Essentially, the process goes like this:
When institutions try and fail to meet the new constituent needs, we witness a deceptive width of the chasm between the current state and the emerging state. In reality, the chasm isn't that wide. The real obstacle is the process and philosophical shift required to operate in an entirely new way.
As my colleague, Pete Kim, so eloquently said it, "many brands secretly fear that connecting with the community will lead to dilution and destruction."
So the real challenge is changing the organization, not meeting the new needs. We see the distance between these types of events get shorter every year, especially in recent years. The 'new organization' must embrace change as part of it's DNA — it's underlying structure must embrace an operating paradigm that enables ease of adaptation.
Haven,
Everyone in the social media space ought to go back and read Cluetrain Manifesto again. I know it is a classic, but its claim that Markets are Conversations remains as clear a statement of the issues involved in your point about institutional change as any I've seen.
Your analysis of the interplay between emerging needs and institutional adaptation nicely works through the dynamics of how it works. I look forward to reading your thinking on this topic as you work it out.
Have you seen anyone besides Umair Haque use the "DNA" construct?
Larry, funny you should mention Cluetrain — I'm actually reading it right now. I agree that everyone should reread it. It's very impressive how right the authors got it as far back as they did. Thanks for the kind words, and I look forward to continuing the dialogue.
Ethan, I haven seen anyone else use the DNA construct formally (although Kevin Kelly may have use it briefly in Out Of Control, but I can't remember for sure. I find it so useful because we really have entered an era that requires a fundamental shift in how things are done. I also see some companies that "get it" and too many that don't — It's just in some people's DNA. Do you think it's an appropriate construct?