This post is a bit of a after-action review following our consulting exercise in BGIMGT566.
The experience was a huge hit with the class. It gave us the opportunity to experience how far we've come over the course of the quarter. It challenged us in a really fun way.
I was on the energy team. The experience of working together, even with brand new partners, was really strong and high level. Had we had the chance to meet for perhaps 2 hours more, I think we would have returned with a spot-on campaign idea. As it was, we ran out of time, mostly because we allowed ourselves to get stuck in solving the problem that was presented, and in doing that, got sidetracked. It was all good work, but I left feeling unresolved.
So the conversation continued, albeit, inside my head. It went a bit like this:
Insight: Social media is a communication tool, not a problem solving tool. It is good at broadcasting info via a wide network. Not so good at designing programs. I've noticed that conversations around energy often get bogged down in the complications, the details, and the frustration of seeing the huge gap between what is and what is possible. (And, yes, that is where the business opportunity lies, though I dare say, attempts to tap it, by and large, have not hit the zeitgeist quite yet). My goal is to become better at facilitating conversations that lead toward simple changes as opposed to ones that stymie us with complicated, seemingly irresolvable problems.
Our client came to us wanting to help energy auditors achieve a higher rate of converting home energy audits into homeowner action to reduce energy. We re-designed a process that would reduce or eliminate some of the barriers. It was a decent attempt at a business model for a couple hours effort, but to me, the social media component of our design felt more forced, than organic to the system.
With the benefit of morning-after hindsight, I did a mental do-over.
1. What is the underlying goal? Save energy (as opposed to selling home improvements).
2. Who has the power to do that? Our client came to us with a focus on energy auditors. Throughout our conversation, we bounced between auditors and home-owners as the audience. There are many ways the audit processes that we'd collectively experienced could be improved to lead to more "sales". But that is a design challenge more than a social media one. If energy auditors were a tightly knit group, perhaps active in a professional group or in a situation where several are active in a company where their role is similar and they can influence program design a social media campaign might be useful.One could imagine contests, incentives, shared among peers. My observation is that they are loosely affiliated, work in a wide variety of programs and employer relationships from utility to independent contractor to HVAC Sales. As such social media is not the best tool to reach them. So I switched my attention to homeowners. They have the ability to act or not act, and we can reach and connect them using social media.
3. What simple behavior change should we target? Our group got bogged down by the complexity of the larger issue. In doing that, we missed the chance to find something simple as the focus of a campaign.
Coming back to it, I decided to target light bulbs and shower heads. Lighting represents 11% of home energy use and is an easy and simple target. And like lighting, the aesthetics of lo-water shower heads has gotten pretty darned nice, and once installed, will lower hot water use for a lifetime. It is so easy. Upfront cost is minimal and long-term savings potential is great. Takes only minutes to implement. Why don't people just screw them in? That's a simple behavior change we can ask for.
Resulting campaign proposal: Just Screw It, a combination video/Rippl campaign using happy imagery, and played to the tune of Michael Jackson's song "Just Beat It".
Showing posts with label BGIMGT566sx. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BGIMGT566sx. Show all posts
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Friday, December 2, 2011
Week 11 Learning Journal Post
We learned a lot about theories of behavior change. The theoretical grounding is something I can bring to all of my work moving forward. Social media is just a tool, but is hardly the only place where I get to use it. Having a framework is such a help. It can be a check-in and a check list. Am I using all of the tools available to me or to my client? Can I make something more persuasive, more relevant, more interactive, more powerful?
While we havent had the chance to hear actual team reflections yet, one common theme from chatting with friends from other teams is that they got a lot of views, but when it came to actual reporting back on the , something they asked of their audiences so they could track results, they were surprised by the low turnout. Certainly finals week played a role, but to my mind, we all learned that triggering behavior change is harder than it looks. And asking people to do AND to report is a big ask. Most of us chose to communicate within a BGI audience - presumably a group that is highly motivated by liking, reciprocity, and commitment. And it was still hard to get an action to occur.
I could quibble that some of the desired report back mechanisms could have been made more clear or easier to do. But the deeper message is that the task is tough and will likely take a combination of multiple iterations, the right medium (did we talk enough about how to choose a medium?), great use of persuasive tools, and perhaps a stroke of good timing.
We are beginners. I feel lucky to have this opportunity to play around in a safe space while we build our skills.
While we havent had the chance to hear actual team reflections yet, one common theme from chatting with friends from other teams is that they got a lot of views, but when it came to actual reporting back on the , something they asked of their audiences so they could track results, they were surprised by the low turnout. Certainly finals week played a role, but to my mind, we all learned that triggering behavior change is harder than it looks. And asking people to do AND to report is a big ask. Most of us chose to communicate within a BGI audience - presumably a group that is highly motivated by liking, reciprocity, and commitment. And it was still hard to get an action to occur.
I could quibble that some of the desired report back mechanisms could have been made more clear or easier to do. But the deeper message is that the task is tough and will likely take a combination of multiple iterations, the right medium (did we talk enough about how to choose a medium?), great use of persuasive tools, and perhaps a stroke of good timing.
We are beginners. I feel lucky to have this opportunity to play around in a safe space while we build our skills.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Week 10 Learning Journal Post
A good team is really valuable. I'm reminded of this as Team Rippl enters the home stretch of our Social Media project.
We took on an ambitious project. We are each excited about it. People are working together really well, sharing talents and playing off each others' skills. Everyone has put in a lot. And it looks like we are not going to be able to do all that we had hoped, at least not by the class deadline.
That isn't to say that we won't meet the class requirements. We think we have done that. We developed a proposal, researched how others have managed similar behavior change projects, similar tools, and similar content, incorporated what we've learned from Fogg and Cialdini, and created and shared a couple of iterations of the conceptual framework and overall look and feel. (In hindsight, we might have done more in the way of asking for outside feedback on our iterations earlier in the process).
In taking on a project that was more complex than most, we took a risk. In addition to identifying a behavior to change and developing a campaign around that, Rippl includes developing and promoting a computer-application as a tool others can use to facilitate change. The actual computer application probably wont be done. It turned out to be much harder than anticipated. And the promotion, which kind of depended on what the application could and could not actually accomplish at this stage of its development, will likely get a bit short-shrifted. And that is OK. At least its OK with the team, and we hope it is OK with the professor.
We've had the chance to learn a lot about taking a seemingly simple concept and focusing on it long enough to understand that achieving simplicity can involve a lot of complexity. We've learned about checking in frequently in order to maintain a shared vision, even as things progress and change. We've had the chance to develop a long-term vision along with short-term phases that could move us toward that vision. And we've learned just how valuable each others' talents are to our success.
Even though the project could be described as a failure, I see it as a huge success. And one of my hopes and dreams is that we find a way to keep working on it and making it into a reality. Hopefully with the benefit of strategy/technical consult from Christopher, Mirian and Elyn.
We took on an ambitious project. We are each excited about it. People are working together really well, sharing talents and playing off each others' skills. Everyone has put in a lot. And it looks like we are not going to be able to do all that we had hoped, at least not by the class deadline.
That isn't to say that we won't meet the class requirements. We think we have done that. We developed a proposal, researched how others have managed similar behavior change projects, similar tools, and similar content, incorporated what we've learned from Fogg and Cialdini, and created and shared a couple of iterations of the conceptual framework and overall look and feel. (In hindsight, we might have done more in the way of asking for outside feedback on our iterations earlier in the process).
In taking on a project that was more complex than most, we took a risk. In addition to identifying a behavior to change and developing a campaign around that, Rippl includes developing and promoting a computer-application as a tool others can use to facilitate change. The actual computer application probably wont be done. It turned out to be much harder than anticipated. And the promotion, which kind of depended on what the application could and could not actually accomplish at this stage of its development, will likely get a bit short-shrifted. And that is OK. At least its OK with the team, and we hope it is OK with the professor.
We've had the chance to learn a lot about taking a seemingly simple concept and focusing on it long enough to understand that achieving simplicity can involve a lot of complexity. We've learned about checking in frequently in order to maintain a shared vision, even as things progress and change. We've had the chance to develop a long-term vision along with short-term phases that could move us toward that vision. And we've learned just how valuable each others' talents are to our success.
Even though the project could be described as a failure, I see it as a huge success. And one of my hopes and dreams is that we find a way to keep working on it and making it into a reality. Hopefully with the benefit of strategy/technical consult from Christopher, Mirian and Elyn.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Week 8 Learning Journal Post - Persuasion
The Shelton Group just released its 2011 EcoPulse survey. Based on the answers of 1,502 Americans, the survey found that the #1 driver of energy-efficiency investment continues to be to save money on utility bills (28%). It also found that in order to see a measurable improvement in their bills, on average, Americans need to take at least 4 energy saving steps, yet most people take only 2.3 steps - not enough to move the dial on their utility bill.
The survey also found that lower income Americans would rather spend more on their energy bill than invest in energy efficiency. Why? For the most part, it is because they can't afford to invest. Oddly enough, wealthier Americans are more sensitive to increases in their energy bills than those with less money.
While money might be a key motivator, the study also looked at other forms of persuasion to learn more about which techniques are most effective. They found that social norming is a powerful tool to convince people to shift their energy consumption habits. In other words, energy use declines among those who are identified as using more energy than their neighbors, and messages that reinforce the idea that other people are saving energy encourage folks to do something so that they will fit in with the group.
This is consistent with findings from a number of projects and studies. It suggests that an important persuasive element is to incorporate social proof into broader energy efficiency outreach campaigns. Based on additional information, the benefits of social proof tend to wear out over time, so it is also important to include other persuasive elements as well. These might include revising existing rebate programs so they provide positive and time-relevant feedback loops, and rewards that are closely tied to monthly energy use.
With consideration of BJ Fogg's Motivation-Ability-Trigger model, I can see tons of opportunity for innovation in the energy efficiency space. I'd like to explore barriers and techniques to motivate change further in my Beat Blog.
The survey also found that lower income Americans would rather spend more on their energy bill than invest in energy efficiency. Why? For the most part, it is because they can't afford to invest. Oddly enough, wealthier Americans are more sensitive to increases in their energy bills than those with less money.
When asked how much how much their monthly bill would have to go up to push them spend more money on energy efficient home improvements, those making higher incomes ($100,000 or more) gave an average answer of $113, compared to $120 for those earning lower incomes (less than $25,000). Those with graduate degrees had an even lower threshold -- $98, compared to $122 for those with only a high school degree or less.Those are some pretty big increases. I live in an area where energy costs are low compared to other parts of the country. But using the figures above, the monthly cost for someone living in a home that performs comparably to my own would have to triple before financial motivation would kick in as a serious factor. This implies that the mechanisms that are currently in place to encourage energy efficiency, which largely consist of poorly advertised, fractured, and complex utility and tax rebate schemes along with an occasional bill insert-based outreach campaign, are poorly suited to create changes in behavior.
While money might be a key motivator, the study also looked at other forms of persuasion to learn more about which techniques are most effective. They found that social norming is a powerful tool to convince people to shift their energy consumption habits. In other words, energy use declines among those who are identified as using more energy than their neighbors, and messages that reinforce the idea that other people are saving energy encourage folks to do something so that they will fit in with the group.
This is consistent with findings from a number of projects and studies. It suggests that an important persuasive element is to incorporate social proof into broader energy efficiency outreach campaigns. Based on additional information, the benefits of social proof tend to wear out over time, so it is also important to include other persuasive elements as well. These might include revising existing rebate programs so they provide positive and time-relevant feedback loops, and rewards that are closely tied to monthly energy use.
With consideration of BJ Fogg's Motivation-Ability-Trigger model, I can see tons of opportunity for innovation in the energy efficiency space. I'd like to explore barriers and techniques to motivate change further in my Beat Blog.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Week 5 Learning Journal - Copyrights and licenses
I spent several years on the Board of a small farmers market. We were really into developing the market into a community gathering spot - more than just a place to shop. We welcomed local bands and music education programs as a way to help them, help the market, and help the overall community.
Bands loved playing for us, and we loved having them. They would skip bigger markets, larger audiences, and gigs that did more than pay gas money just to join us. After a short time, we had more bands vying for spots than market days. The variety, especially for a smaller community, was pretty cool. It included variations on jazz, swing, rock, blues, string quartet, opera, country, fiddle, ska, and more. We even hosted music school recitals and tryouts.
Then came the letter.
Sony/BMG demanded that the market purchase a venue license or face threat of lawsuit. Long story short, if a piece of music is subject to copyright, users must pay a royalty. Since Sony/BMG owns most of the copyrights, the argument was that if a band played a cover song or even if they played an original song that is owned by Sony/BMG, then the market owed them money. It sounded too ridiculous to be true, but we did the research, and sure enough, the wording of the law supports them 100%. They offer a tiered system of licenses ranging from concert hall to nightclub to one-time concert - nothing geared to a non-paying audience that meets outside on a Saturday morning while they are shopping for groceries at a nonprofit venue.
The two 45-minute sets that took place each Saturday from April to October were considered to be 28 individual concerts. The cost would wipe us out. Plus it would only include Sony/ BMG music. Technically we would need separate agreement with all the other owners.
It turns out that markets across the country were being threatened. Noone could figure out a rhyme or reason as to why one market got a letter, but another nearby, did not. Many markets banned all music as a result.
At mine, we figured out that pre-1922 music was not subject to copyright. Most of our bands were regulars, and we worked with them so that they agreed to play only old-time, pre-1922 music, or original compositions not subject to licensing fees. Some bands, especially the ones who did rock, blues, and country covers, dropped out. Others took up the challenge to bring original, local and old-time music that was a good match for our farmers market, which is a very small town, locally-focused kind of place. We came up with an answer that worked. It means that audiences miss out on tons of favorite music. But we did get to keep our music program alive, and we get to encourage and build audience for the old Americana in American.
I hoped to learn enough about this in my Social Media class to confidently post and share content on the web without fear of a Sony/BMG moment. And - to be fair, also to make sure that artists and creators are fairly attributed and compensated for their work, as I know that our enahnced ability to copy and share makes that a big issue.
I did learn more than I started with. But, unfortunately (or perhaps, fortunately), allowable uses are vague enough to seem like "eye of the beholder" kind of standards. For instance - I can comment on a creation and quote it in part. I can use a part of a song, but not to create a mood. I can capture copyright material incidentally as long as it is not a primary focus, but I can use it to launch a discussion or to recombine it.
Confusing. It is easy to see how disputes happen.
Bands loved playing for us, and we loved having them. They would skip bigger markets, larger audiences, and gigs that did more than pay gas money just to join us. After a short time, we had more bands vying for spots than market days. The variety, especially for a smaller community, was pretty cool. It included variations on jazz, swing, rock, blues, string quartet, opera, country, fiddle, ska, and more. We even hosted music school recitals and tryouts.
Then came the letter.
Sony/BMG demanded that the market purchase a venue license or face threat of lawsuit. Long story short, if a piece of music is subject to copyright, users must pay a royalty. Since Sony/BMG owns most of the copyrights, the argument was that if a band played a cover song or even if they played an original song that is owned by Sony/BMG, then the market owed them money. It sounded too ridiculous to be true, but we did the research, and sure enough, the wording of the law supports them 100%. They offer a tiered system of licenses ranging from concert hall to nightclub to one-time concert - nothing geared to a non-paying audience that meets outside on a Saturday morning while they are shopping for groceries at a nonprofit venue.
The two 45-minute sets that took place each Saturday from April to October were considered to be 28 individual concerts. The cost would wipe us out. Plus it would only include Sony/ BMG music. Technically we would need separate agreement with all the other owners.
It turns out that markets across the country were being threatened. Noone could figure out a rhyme or reason as to why one market got a letter, but another nearby, did not. Many markets banned all music as a result.
At mine, we figured out that pre-1922 music was not subject to copyright. Most of our bands were regulars, and we worked with them so that they agreed to play only old-time, pre-1922 music, or original compositions not subject to licensing fees. Some bands, especially the ones who did rock, blues, and country covers, dropped out. Others took up the challenge to bring original, local and old-time music that was a good match for our farmers market, which is a very small town, locally-focused kind of place. We came up with an answer that worked. It means that audiences miss out on tons of favorite music. But we did get to keep our music program alive, and we get to encourage and build audience for the old Americana in American.
I hoped to learn enough about this in my Social Media class to confidently post and share content on the web without fear of a Sony/BMG moment. And - to be fair, also to make sure that artists and creators are fairly attributed and compensated for their work, as I know that our enahnced ability to copy and share makes that a big issue.
I did learn more than I started with. But, unfortunately (or perhaps, fortunately), allowable uses are vague enough to seem like "eye of the beholder" kind of standards. For instance - I can comment on a creation and quote it in part. I can use a part of a song, but not to create a mood. I can capture copyright material incidentally as long as it is not a primary focus, but I can use it to launch a discussion or to recombine it.
Confusing. It is easy to see how disputes happen.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Social Change Videos
We've been asked to find some good examples of social change videos and share them here. There are tons of great videos out there on all sorts of topics. I chose to focus on environmentally themed videos with a sense of humor. Yes, they really do exist.
Enjoy.
My all-time favorite...Polluter Harmony (3:06)
Canvas Bags by Tim Minchin, (3:14)
Store Wars (this one runs a little over-long, IMHO, but it is adorable)
http://www.green.tv/store_wars?set_location=en
I also found a couple nice bits about energy efficiency. I will post them on my Beat Blog.
Enjoy.
My all-time favorite...Polluter Harmony (3:06)
Canvas Bags by Tim Minchin, (3:14)
Store Wars (this one runs a little over-long, IMHO, but it is adorable)
http://www.green.tv/store_wars?set_location=en
I also found a couple nice bits about energy efficiency. I will post them on my Beat Blog.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Week 3 Learning Journal Post
Credit to Chris Allen for finding this awesome image. Leave the computer and come back a day or two later, only to find 500+ RSS feeds, not to mention whatever else is piling up. Even without a pressing reason to read them over, my desire to stay up to date, along with the stress that I might be falling behind, gives my a heart flutter. And not that good flutter we all know and love either.
My new practice. Scan - Focus - Act
First. Take a deep breath. I don't have to choose between reading everything and deleting everything. Just scan the list and star the ones that seem to be worth a second look.
Second. Take another run thru and read the ones that look interesting. Decide whether to bookmark them to Delicious, share with a friend, or share them using Google Reader's star, like and share features. Spend time on what is of value to me right now, in this moment. Save or ditch the rest.
Third. Delete the rest, and have a fabulous day.
Hmmm. This scan approach really puts a lot of focus on enticing headlines, titles, and lead sentences.
To follow up on a couple of suggested topics for this post...
1. Questions, Ideas??? Sometimes we get an instruction like "invite people to your blog" or "share and comment on other student's Delicious links". It would sure help if tasks came with instructions (especially given how many assignments we must complete in so few days). I imagine each of us is struggling with, and discovering tricks and tips about the services on our own, some more successfully than others. What could we create that would be an effective, inviting, and short way to help each other out? Or, maybe better, can we find and share existing resources that do a great job?
2. Quotes from readings or the wll eereb..I'd be happy to lead a discussion about our own feelings and experiences of what is too much tech, or inappropriate tech. A few example quotes on the topic of tech addiction...
* If you find yourself paying more attention to your Blackberry than your dinner companion, you may have a problem. New research suggests that as technology addiction takes hold, our ability to empathise diminishes.
* A genuine feeling of panic when your phone loses its signal or runs out of battery may indicate the beginnings of a dependency, psychologists say.
Retrieved from: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/tech-addict-when-you-just-cant-switch-off-2006769.html
Here is a quote backed by scientists, though science doesn't add anything new in this case. This describes my experience to a T. I am aware that it is a bit of a problem. Is that so bad?
According to New York Times article, Scientists say "our ability to focus is being undermined by bursts of information. These play to a primitive impulse to respond to immediate opportunities and threats. The stimulation provokes excitement — a dopamine squirt — that researchers say can be addictive. In its absence, people feel bored." Richtel, M (2010, June 6 Web 2.0 Expo, New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/technology/07brain.html
(edited a bit)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)