September 29, 2005
After last night's Edge debate at the Royal Institute of Architects, Londoners now know what we as entrepreneurial revolutionaries have predicted since 1984 as the consequence of our global humanity’s networking age. Some time in the next 7 years the world’s stockmarkets are going to go into the deepest ever slump, making the 1920s look like a walk through the park UNLESS we can change global systems connecting peoples around the world to be more collaborative and trustworthy than at any time my life has witnessed. This will spiral into even bigger problems for the poorest people around our world.
Human relationships system compound destruction when they are wrongly measured and when their communications qualities are poor. In other words wrongly brand valued, which they have been since wrong maths was introduced to put a number on brand valuation in the late 1980s.
Poor communication quality, surprisingly to some mass media agents comes about when the message from the top is too precise combined with the fact that the system is changing. At that time what is needed to innovate is everyone trusting each other enough to ask great questions not some AD/PR agent with spending a billion dollars of budget singularising the voice of the commander in chief. In a past era,truly great companies were founded around exploring deep contexts and top people did not want cultures to be so dominated that learning was blocked and conflicted at every separate business unit or professional’s door. What changed the top’s understanding of quality of communications was spreadsheeting of management by singular numbers. Now I like seeing an organisation’s proof of success as much as the next man or woman. But successful systems live by tensely connecting two opposite stories: the past and the future. The fact that the past can be measured by a single number does not mean that is more valuable than seeing what future is compounding. In 2000, economists (Unseen Wealth) proved that 80% of wealth in service & networked economies compound with future connectivity not what was reported as successful numbers in the last quarter. What hi-trust and high innovation human relations systems demand is a maths of forward conflict resolution that uses multiplication to model connectivity of flows everywhere contextually the opposite of that which the monopoly of past accounting uses plus to separate analysis.
Moreover, due to erroneous economic models of intangibles which have not progressed from machine capital to include interactions of human & social capitals, transparency of network boundaries through every global locality, and compound consequences, most of the world’s largest organisational systems are unknowingly multiplying each other’s decline from pharmaceutical sectors, to governance of communal safety, to the future of people’s pensions, to the obesity and poisoned food chains, which image-ridden brands seek to addict us to from childhood up. But is becoming evident that the pied piper of stockmarket destruction will be branded with an unusual identity: Peak Oil.
Now Peak Oil movement’s noise is correct in only one message: we have 7 years to breakthrough in weaning off our world’s future from being solely addicted to carbon and other dirty energies that pollute in use. If we fail to encourage innovative questions such as: for how many decades have inventors been studying how to scale up photosynthesis energies that clean as they are used? then Peak Oil will ensure that the world’s markets will destruct in financial mayhem. Will we collaborate in time? How great a part can public broadcasting play in championing an iterative inquiry? and How fast are sustainability investments scaling up the new inventions? These are sorts of questions all human beings need to collaborate in debating now. Worthwhile opening an urgent dialogue around a network near you? If so join our worldwide register of peoples. Sustainability Billionaires or Peak Oil – the choice is yours. permalink
Comments:Links to this post
I hope we act sufﬁciently quickly, Chris. You are right about the intertwining of these systems: one goes, a lot gets taken down. The ones that won’t survive are those that haven’t used brand in an inclusive way—and that’s by looking after welfare of humans on a planetary scale. Whether or not the oil companies contribute to environmental ills, they can do better. We do have a deadline: I hope we act before it’s too late.Post a Comment
September 26, 2005
My good friend Stefan Engeseth, author of Detective Marketing and the upcoming One, has started a blog at blog.detectivemarketing.com. A few of the gems are from his books, but he posts from time to time with his inspirations. Wait a few more weeks and you should be able to download the ﬁrst chapter of his new book. permalink
Comments:Links to this post
Thank you for popping by with your question. Detective Marketing and One talk about how to incorporate the consumer movement into planning one’s own brand strategy—a favourite topic of Stefan Engeseth. The earlier book is simpler; the later one is more comprehensive.
My honest opinion: the later book is more traditional in its presentation; the earlier one is fun and can be better thought of as an inspirational, creative guide.Post a Comment
September 22, 2005
I’m not sure why I remain so charitable toward my compatriots Down Under. Lucire had its party at Crobar in Manhattan, attended by Fox & Friends, New York Post, The New York Times, Al Hurra, Fashion News Live, StyleZone TV, MAMi and many others. I saw coverage in The Palm Beach Post, New York and elsewhere, including the blogosphere. The New Zealand media were conspicuously absent, and no one followed up on licensing footage, despite earlier emails. Post-party, the usual suspects (mostly online) helped us get the news out, with print and television not among them.
Before some of the regular readers of this blog tell me it’s because I’m outspoken, a bit of a backgrounder: every business I have started in this country became known abroad ﬁrst, even in the days before I exercised my PR connections. My font software business received its ﬁrst item of coverage in the American national press in 1994 or thereabouts, and 2004 in New Zealand. My brand consulting work took less time, but again it was better known outside this country than inside. Lucire, as a web title, was already doing business with AltaVista and getting in to USA Today long before the local crowd knew about it.
This can only be narrowed down to two things: I am right about the ever-strengthening tall poppy syndrome and its unwillingness to help the New Zealand entrepreneur. Or, if others have experienced differently, maybe we can conclude that it is racism.
I wrote to a colleague to tell her that I wasn’t after Tom Jones-style fandom with knickers being thrown at me during branding lectures, but I do ask for the same respect that I show others. (Maybe that does entail the knickers.)
So where does this leave us? For a start, it leaves New Zealand as a completely untenable basis for country-of-origin-effect branding. What the Prime Minister told Inc. magazine in August about her pro-entrepreneurial stance is misleading. Now, I have met the PM and found her charming, and for a politician, honest and free from Hackerese. But whether or not her cabinet colleagues and their ministries are carrying on that wish is open to question. Hence, I could not, and did not, vote for her—nor did I vote for her clueless principal opposition in last week’s General Election.
The only solution to these ills is to start championing New Zealanders for their success. I don’t mean the regional bludgers’ awards, which I have blogged before. I do mean getting over our fear of letting one or two people shine. New York has shown me a contrast that I knew existed deep down from my earlier visits, to the point of 15 to 20 cameras vying for my attention, and three microphones, along with my 700 guests. Domestically, somehow, this is not seen as news—although I am struggling to consider who else from here has been launching magazines in the United States presently. Maybe the priorities between the Murdoch Press in New York and the Fairfax and Packer Press in New Zealand are quite different.
Oh well, let the Australian-owned media focus on the story about a failed Green Party MP candidate run through the streets of Auckland naked. That obviously is far more in the public interest than my creating jobs for New Zealanders, and putting foreign exchange into this country.
The Australian-, Canadian- and Irish-owned media may ﬁnd, in the not too distant future, that I have joined them, moving my HQ offshore and abandoning the once-proud “made in New Zealand” mantra that we have used in consumer marketing for a year. I take no pleasure in the change, but I have to eat. permalink
Comments: Post a CommentLinks to this post
September 20, 2005
With a combined century or more of research into transparency of media, BB authors and Medinge invite you to make a mark for wanting to see public broadcasting sector keep spaces open for societiies and communities grassroots issues. This sector (along with the more transprent parties on the internet) is probably globalisation's last chance of any big branding organisation being returned one day to being governed for and by the people
PEOPLE FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING
There are 100s of different reasons why you might have at least one grassroots cause that public broadcasters can keep the light and space open for if their journalists are not ruled by big organsiational interests (whether corporate or government). You can click the above link, become a supporter if you wish, write up a statement of the grassroots issue that you most want public media to keep open and diverse dialogues propagating
Personally I have been studying the dynamics of this war between transparent public and opaque hidden networks for 21 years in over 30 countries. I am happy to discuss any humanitarian context or grassroots challenge until we both understand why it may have worldwide analogies (hi-truist network friends) as well as deep local democratic vitality for human rights or just your own family's freedom to live your lifes making your greatest difference
chris macrae firstname.lastname@example.org www.valuetrue.com permalink
Comments: Post a CommentLinks to this post
September 04, 2005
I am ﬂying out to New York in a few days to make the announcement that our fashion magazine, Lucire, will launch a US print edition. I’ve been especially blessed with the help of Brad Batory and Phillip Johnson, who have put this function together with incredible passion—so much so that Brad is now under the weather.
What is annoying is that every media outlet in the country knows about it, and we have had three bites: The Dominion Post, Thread and Lawfuel, which republished our press release.
TV One, the state broadcaster, knows and was in discussions, but now fails to return calls; as does TV3, the Canadian broadcaster.
Meanwhile, I’ve received four requests from foreign media, and my ﬁrst interview was actually with B&T Marketing and Media in Australia. Editor-in-chief Nicola Brockie has received requests for interviews in the UK and the States now.
Reason for folks ignoring us? Probably the tall poppy syndrome. No one from down here has ever grown magazines into foreign markets this quickly, and with the Hell Pizza billboard attacking President Bush a few weeks ago, I guess anyone who trades with Americans must be similarly evil. Or, there is a problem about my skin colour: singer Bic Runga might be on to something. The editor thinks there is either an edict from someone very fearful of an immigrant succeeding in business, or the fact that New Zealand—she is part of the majority race, incidentally—does not like it when we talk about our successes. Whatever the case, she and I think we’re getting a raw deal.
Oh, did I mention that we have some major celebrities coming? And that this event is on the ofﬁcial Fashion Calendar?
Perhaps I should not take this personally. A few days ago, I received an email from networker extraordinaire, and fellow immigrant, Arnnei Speiser. In it, he pastes a quote from John Veitch on how New Zealand online representation in business, according to one network he is on, has grown by a miniscule amount:
A friend in the USA compiled statistics on 250 new members of Ryze last month. New Zealand does not appear on his list (21 countries). Australia is ﬁfth behind USA, India, UK and Malaysia. Canada was sixth.The meaning? Business people are leaving the nation and not coming back.
New Zealand has a brand all right, and it’s one that says entrepreneurs are not welcome. It is a sad day when the country tells you that being successful in business is politically incorrect. As a Green Party MP might tell you, you get more people patting you on the back for smoking weed than for doing well. Until the nation begins changing its tune—and it’s not the regular New Zealander who has to, as Kiwis have been writing me with congratulatory messages—all the money in the world in its tourism campaigns won’t convince a soul in the din of dissatisﬁed expatriates who had to leave their homeland to realize their dreams. But maybe this is just what the establishment wants: more reliance on dole handouts to maintain power. It’s enough to make you become a conservative. permalink
Comments:Links to this post
I am happy to announce that TV One did respond today, but its sole US correspondent is covering Katrina.
On a related story, the online edition of the National Business Review has caught us—note I said online, where the on-the-ball Kiwi journo seems to dwell. More from NYC, I imagine. See y’all Stateside.Post a Comment
Authors and associates individual blogs
+ Add Beyond Branding to your Blogroll
Add feedsAggregated blogs
Old Beyond Branding blog entries
Get this blog via email
Beyond Branding bloggers