Autocatalysis is the last of the four themes comprising Conversation (the first concept of the Ontology Of Participation). Shared conversations become the fuel for further conversations, initiating a self-replicating process that ensures the preservation of the activity. This idea of autocatalysis comes from biology, but is an interesting application in the context of participation. Stuart Kauffman explains it from a biological perspective: What I call a collectively autocatalytic system is one in which the molecules...Read on

Force is the third of the four themes comprising Conversation (the first concept of the Ontology Of Participation). The force of Conversation happens when an increasing number of people involved in adaptive behaviors exert a force that may trigger a community (the primordial goo of adaptive enterprises). For example, the introduction of blogging software enabled motivated individuals to share their thoughts with large audiences without any expertise in formatting content for publication on the web...Read on

Expectation is the next of the four themes comprising Conversation (the first concept of the Ontology Of Participation). Certain functional qualities of a product allow for it to be used in a familiar way, but to achieve an unexpected outcome (the intended use of some products is broad enough to allow for flexibility in its use). For instance, communication technology (telephone) has permeated our lives for several decades now. Its purpose is to allow us...Read on

Intention is the first of four themes comprising Conversation (the first concept of the Ontology Of Participation). During the design and creation of a product, certain considerations are made that influence its final outcome. Some are specifically related to the product itself (interface affordances, shapes of buttons, functionality, outcomes of a service, etc.), some are the enterprise's needs (cost break even, profit, governance, competitive advantage, etc.), and others processes from which the product is realized...Read on

The first concept of the Ontology Of Participation is Conversation: Individuals interact with things in a more meaningful way — they have a conversation with products — extending them beyond the utility for which they were created and into new design spaces. Conversation with a product occurs when an individual uses it in a manner inconsistent with the specifications intended by the originating enterprise. Rather than the product being a completed part of the world,...Read on

Members of adapting enterprises pursue engaging and meaningful interactions that embody a special kind of participation. As the behaviors of these communities continue to emerge and become more common, their impact on products, and on the design practice itself, will be significant. It’s critical for both the originating enterprises and the design discipline to be aware of the people who will engage in these activities. Both need to understand the underlying concepts that explain how...Read on

The fourth example of participation, systematic engagement, is supported by a platform designed to act as an organized system that accommodates or even encourages adaptive behaviors. This platform is comprised of a set of fundamental guiding principles established and structured to enable an individual to engage in creating or modifying a product. It allows for these types of changes to occur without the need for the time, money, or intellectual application typically required to develop...Read on

Until recently, the systems and media available for published self-expression have been reserved for professionals like writers and broadcasters. This chasm between the average person and the professional existed because of the significant costs involved with production and distribution. In the past several years, personal technology has enabled non-professional individuals to begin to bypass traditional outlets and to make their own self-declarations — the third example of participation. In the early 1990s, a few individuals...Read on

The second example of participation is group assembly. Group assembly involves ad-hoc gatherings or coordinated actions by groups of people using technology originally intended to enable one-on-one communication with known individuals (such as text messaging or conversations on mobile phones). However, when the members of adapting enterprises use these technologies, the participants in the group often do not know each other. While this alternative use of technology is not explicitly impossible or prohibited by the...Read on

In my previous post, I described the phenomenon of participatory culture and how institutions are no longer in control (see Making With People). There are several examples of how this participation manifests itself in the world, and the first examples I’d like to talk about are hard-hacking and soft-hacking. HARD-HACKING Hard-hacking is the tangible sibling to soft-hacking, which I’ll describe in a moment. Hard-hacking occurs when a person makes modifications to a physical object after...Read on

I've been thinking about how the dialogue between institutions and constituents has changed quite a bit over time and how that relates to the concept of making. I think you can break the participants of making down into three categories (keep in mind that when I refer to things, products, or making, I'm referring to what is made--an artifact, service, system, environment, communication, etc., 'product' doesn't necessarily mean a physical object.): The first type of...Read on

How should a company participate in social media? It's one of the most perplexing issues facing companies today. The trends are clear: people increasingly interact with one another online, amplified by social technologies. But once a company steps in, bad things typically happen. The problem? Firms always place their own needs ahead of their own and they can only think about their product as the subject matter. It's this egoistic approach that turns people off....Read on

Having past experience with ethnographic research, I certainly can attest to the unbelievable value you get from observing people. I'm shocked more companies don't do more of this, but I guess everyone is still bogged down in quantitative data. The problem is, quantitative data tells you 'what' is happening (assuming that you ask the right questions or know what to look for), but what it doesn't do is tell you 'why' people are behaving that...Read on

We've seen the music industry suffer at the business end of disruptive services like P2P file sharing and the shattering of a business model at the hands of Apple's superior media experience and ecosystem. And, Apple recently took the mobile phone experience and turned it on it's head, leaving the device manufacturers left scratching their heads and the carriers' panties in a wod. The travel industry suffers from transparency thanks to a little site called...Read on

I'm in the process of interviewing people for my upcoming Forrester report on corporate social responsibility. One of my interview participants pointed me to this great video by Annie Leonard called The Story Of Stuff. This 20 minute video illustrates the life cycle of the things we use every day. Annie, with a great illustrated animation hovering behind her, explains the stages of this process as extraction (obtaining the natural resources), production (using energy to...Read on

Many companies are delusional about their customer centricity. Many claim to be just that, but only a handful actually are. It takes a big shift in philosophy to be human-centric, and most firms have a hard time overcoming that. Here are just a few of the key characteristics it takes for a firm to be human-centric: Human-centricity starts at the top. If these initiatives are buried deep within the organization, they have little chance of...Read on

On Thursday I attended the MIT Enterprise Forum's Power, Drugs & Money Innovation Summit over at the Seaport World Trade Center. The event targeted New England entrepreneurs and focused on energy, medicine, and finance. The mid-morning panel session on the future of New England was pretty good. It consisted of a good mix of panelists including Doug Banks (Editor, Mass High Tech), Robert Buderi (Founder, CEO, Editor in Chief, Xconomy), Scott Kirsner (Innovation Economy columnist,...Read on

Bring on a designer at a senior level to change your perspective. Design thinking is where the real differentiation is going to be in a few years. If you don’t start taking steps now, you’re going to have a tough time catching up. You may even get scooped by your competitor, or even worse, a company from a completely different industry could come in and redefine your business—on it’s terms, not yours. Think I’m crazy?...Read on

Get to know your customer’s better. As an analyst at Forrester, I’m always talking to companies about opportunities with social media, marketing, new product development, and design. I’m constantly appalled by how little companies know about their customers. So few have any actionable knowledge beyond the standard demographics. I hope firms will put a little more time, effort and money into the research process – and yes, that means qualitative research.Having past experience with...Read on

Yes, that’s a ‘V’ not an ‘S’ in the title. We’ve got a fresh new year ahead of us here are a few things I hope to see happen in 2008. I know they won’t all happen, but I hope to see a few progressive companies set the tone and make some headway.Get to know your customer’s better.Measure engagement—the real engagement.Be a little more fearless with social media.Reconsider your business model.Bring on a designer at...Read on

Bruce Nussbaum of Business Week had some interesting things to say about design and the role of the CEO several weeks ago. It really starts to touch on a point I've been struggling with in my head for some time now. Bruce makes some great points about the design discipline and the role it is playing (or should be playing) in the commercial world. As a Forrester Analyst, I'm exposed to many business ideas that...Read on