Jonathan MacDonald is one of the leading keynote speakers in the world, unlocking unique insights and new thinking for audiences looking for a better mindset and more effective tools to maximise future opportunities within an environment of perpetual change and uncertainty.
For the largest companies in the world including Google, Apple, Nestlé, IKEA, P&G and Unilever, Jonathan expands thought around the potential of technology, the shaping of society and the realities of business, all of which are constantly influenced by fast-paced, relentless change.
According to the Gartner Hype Cycle, a ”technology trigger” such as a new platform, channel or tool, will often cause a period of ”inflated expectations” across any industry. Perceptions of magic bullets, ultimate answers or holy grails are eagerly shared across industry commentators, whilst acronyms and cool new words are created, making unknown marketers into experts. Companies make big bets on this brave new world, employing their staff to fill roles prefixed with “Head of” or suffixed with “Guru”. These bets are often tactical rather than strategic, with hope of a fundamental business upside. Speakers talk about concepts that may or may not be based on any structured reasoning, whilst the confusion inside audiences is used as justification that yes, indeed, everything has changed – thus fuelling inflated expectations out of panic if nothing else.
The Gartner Hype Cycle then dictates there is a ”trough of disillusionment”: a period where we realise that our expectations were too high, too elaborate, or too far removed from anything tangible. Gradually there is a ”slope of enlightenment” where things make actual business sense and finally we do business in a ”plateau of productivity”. So says the Gartner Hype Cycle and over the last 20 years in business, I’d have to agree. The question is where are we now on the curve, if the technology trigger is a networked society of consumerised IT and empowered people with ability to access, edit, create, publish and share information, without the need for large technology expenditure?
Even if we assess our position to be one of living with inflated expectations (often linked to some level of confusion), the two most common questions I hear are:
1. From all the trends and changes, what is likely to directly affect my business, either in a positive or negative way?
2. Due to the outcome of the first question, what should we be doing right now to best position ourselves for an uncertain future?
In my opinion these are the right questions to ask.
The starting point for any answers should be from a position of clarity. In other words, to assess what is likely to affect business in a positive or negative way, one needs to clearly understand what it happening that possibly could affect the business. There is so much information out there, it makes sense to either develop or hire a service that can constantly monitor what’s happening and distill it down. Due to having little time to discover and learn, it’s important that the methodology of doing this is harmonious with our timeframes in day-to-day life and work.
In the context of congresses and events, there are some obvious areas worth monitoring. Certainly the area of virtualisation, enabling physical interaction to be virtual, is shaping the concept of how a meeting or event takes place. Taking this further it is worth monitoring developments in ‘Beaming’.
Beaming is a scientific project for virtual transportation that started in 2010 and runs until 2014 (http://beaming-eu.org/). Despite it seeming far-fetched, the reality is that technology and science are progressing so rapidly, there is a strong argument to consider beaming as a signpost of how people may be experiencing interaction in the future. Back in today though, even if you look at the rise in the capability and affordability of Internet powered communication, it is becoming more common to consider congresses and events involving people outside the geographic location. Today we occasionally see speakers broadcasting in (currently done using ad hoc VOIP calls or webcams), or events broadcasting out to non-attending attendees (currently mainly through live-stream video to websites), but if this became even more popular, how would it effect planning and profit?
Perhaps as you monitor the changes outside your specific organisation you may find other topics that are potentially important. For instance, the empowerment of the general public has meant that people have similar capabilities as traditional organisations. People can now promote as effectively as paid marketers and create, edit, publish and share content at super speed. Most of the population carries micro-journalism devices (a.k.a. phones) and the original hierarchy of corporation on top with customers beneath has now, for better or worse, been re-balanced. More on this subject here: http://thisfluidworld.com/branddemocratisation/ and also here: http://tinyurl.com/refuellingatpeacetime.
It may be that your organisation doesn’t interface with the public, in which case it’s worth mentioning that the same applies even in a B2B context.. The speed of information and perception sharing is just as prolific in professional fields as it is in public. This means that the advocacy of people can and should be used in the best possible way to maximize value exchanges between what we offer and for whom we provide
There are other things too that may be worth monitoring. If any part of your business is involved in the physical production of items, from food to fabrics and everything in between, the developments in 3D printing should be observed carefully. You can read all about it here: http://tinyurl.com/3DValueChain. 3D printers can print out chocolate, car parts, and complex joints for knee operations. You may come across the The Maker Movement, and the more you discover about it, the more you will realise this will likely re-design value chains from start to finish, in all regions, across all industry verticals, including yours.
Looking elsewhere, those who have databases of people may be interested in the developments in digital personas. The structure of identity is morphing due to the capability of technology and the increasing feeling that companies don’t necessarily deserve all of our personal information. You can read more about how our networked society is becoming increasingly prolific in multiple personas here if you wish: http://tinyurl.com/singularpersonas. This subject is related to a central question around who owns what data, especially as the fascination around big data continues to grow: (http://tinyurl.com/privacydilemma).
1. The future is all about digital to such an extent that companies invest considerable sums into becoming more comfortable with digital, mostly without any consideration of what digital means in terms of actual business practice. For example, how digital affects the entire extended marketing mix rather than seeing digital purely as a campaign consideration. What’s actually needed is harmonisation between traditional business logic and new world paradigms, rather than singular inspiration.
2. Mobile is a separate discipline It is exceedingly common to find mobile removed from other channels and considered on its own rather than in cohesion with all other channels. This removal dilutes the opportunity to use mobile as a vehicle to make traditional channels work harder – activating a poster campaign, linking a TV ad to sales, or galvanising an army of fans. What’s actually needed is a strategically sound understanding of how mobile can add value to other channels and the people at the other end of the value chain.
3. Social is a media. For one reason or another, where there are many eyeballs there’s a media planner salivating. The reality is that social interactions are a different science than the bought or owned media environments of old. Social interactions run on a syntax of social capital, exchanging social currencies for joint value. Thus the only media in this space is earned media that is earn-able through positive interactions, transparency, consistency and authenticity. These drive trust which fuels loyalty. Without these, media cannot be earned. In conclusion, the entire media strategy in social media would need to be a trust building strategy – yet commonly it’s about how cool a Facebook page can look. It’s the expectation of some form of profitable result that I find most interesting. What’s actually needed is a pure purpose that manifests in missions that people can believe in and take action upon, thus building on positivity to result in trustworthy relationships.
4. Knowing something is a proxy for doing something. This happens often when people listen to something explained and then nod saying “yeah, we’re on top of that”. When you look deeper you often find that there are many who are aware but few who do something about it. Knowing isn’t doing, but it tricks a person into thinking they are doing something by knowing about it. That’s a major issue. What’s actually needed is an automatic inclusion of the question “so what are we doing about it?” alongside the thought of “we’re on top of that”.
5. Current speed is fast enough. Many organizations feel that the current speed of strategy or activity is fast enough to keep up with the changes outside the organisation. Logically, this would require full understanding of the speed of change outside your company, including all competitors and shifts in customer expectations, but in reality, the understanding of external speed is mainly embryonic. This results in false comfort that tricks people into thinking the internal speed of strategy or activity is fast enough. Rather than outline the outcomes, I’ll leave you to imagine what that can possibly mean. What’s actually needed is constant restlessness that disallows the arrogance in thinking that we’re fast or agile enough.
6. Existing structures will enable success. There appears to be a consistent assumption that an enabling structure in this day and age is to “hire a head of social media”, and then think that will somehow “cover off the new stuff”. The reality? This isn’t a channel addition we’re living through, nor is the economic downturn a ‘recession’. No, this is a paradigm shift of industrial revolution proportions. What’s actually needed is fundamental re-evaluation and organisational transition across all functions, from processes to people.
In summary, we need to be challenging our own activity constantly and watching out for the traps caused by assuming that everything is fine as it is today. We need to be aware that there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that the one thing you can predict with absolute certainty is that change happens. If you’re of the mindset that change is un-welcome, the bad news is that today is the slowest pace of change we’ll ever experience.
