There’s a growing recognition that social media is still evolving from a fairly early stage of development, and there’s a way to go before it gains mainstream adoption and recognition – certainly something I agree with.
I think he’s correct from a business perspective, and from the perspective of people of a certain age. I think anyone of the infamous Generation Y is already well on their way to the Age of Dialogue without even thinking about it. They already gravitate to the conversation, without the hang-ups of the Age of Control. The limiting factor comes from the older generations, which still control larger businesses and strategies. But as the younger generation start to infiltrate the boardroom, they’re bringing the Dialogue with them, whether as a conscious revolution, or just something that makes sense. The only speed bump is how much of it survives the challenges of a structured, institutionalized business.
View Comments so far ↓
1 eaon pritchard // Jun 24, 2008 at 3:33 pm
hmmm.
don’t get too hung up on the age thing.
I know of plenty Gen Y young fogeys with not an ounce of rebellion who can’t wait to conform and join the establishment. that is the sad thing.
Youth is wasted on the young, as Oscar Wilde said.
slightly joking but c’mon with the ‘limiting factors of the older generations’ thing.
2 Dan Thornton // Jun 24, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I take your point, and probably should have made it clearer.
There are plenty of individuals in every generation who love to rebel. And there are plenty in every generation who love to conform.
However, in most large corporations, there are MDs and CEOs who have spent 20 years working their way up in structured, traditional business environments, and to them, the Age of Dialogue is something new, challenging, possibly something to ignore or disregard, more than it’s something to be involved in at present.
3 Jo // Jun 24, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I agree largely. When I first started, the web was a verbally violent place – it is much improved.
I have been disappointed by the Gen Y managers I have encountered though. They might just be young Gen X or too inexperienced.
Power is something that also has to be learned. Put power in the hands of someone who has learned to use it . . .
Gen Y have to prove they can be more than obliging consumers who switch providers as soon as something goes wrong.
That attitude in charge of a plane, an operating theatre, a classroom, the hygiene of a restaurant, my gmail which has been out all day!
4 mn_social_media // Jun 24, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I like the descriptions of the social media age. It’s true that we will all soon communicate to customers this way.
5 Dan Thornton // Jun 24, 2008 at 4:01 pm
True.
I think there are two things at play. One is the legacy of traditional media, for example, with young reporters frequently dismissing digital in favour of print…because of the perceived value of print over digital.
The other is that younger generations (in general stereotype way) seem to be using dialogue as a natural tool for social lives etc, but then leave it at the door of traditional business, either through fear, or reluctance to integrate their outside life with their career.
But that doesn’t stop them using it to deal with other businesses, when they’re the consumer…
Will have to re-edit my post to include the clarity from you and Eaon.
6 Chris Hambly // Jun 24, 2008 at 7:19 pm
I owed you an explanation, though I see the comments by both Eaon and Jo have mostly cleared it up already.
Disruption is a mind-set not borne of age or generation, some of the greatest disruptions in society, and more importantly, business, occurred a long long time ago. Think Thomas Edison disrupting the entire gas lighting system with his electric generator, which then morphed into a powerful utility, making water wheels, steam and various other massive industries redundant. He marketed his products hard ass too, proper having it large disruptive marketing.
In addition, as Jo indicates, and I know Eaon believes, disruption is ineffective without appropriate structured systems in place behind it. Businesses NEED structure, CEOs need to be skilled in structuring their work-force and dialogue is rather, actually no, really fucking expensive, and without a model for costing it all talk of dialogue useage as “mainstream” is bullshitness. Usually at some point someone needs to say, YES, or NO, the buck stops, period, business is not a democracy.
Maybe when Communication Technology Measurement becomes a cheap utility a company can buy-in will it become helpful to the CEO, a bolt-on metric, a strand of data to aid the sums and product development. (the smart people are building that).
As for snarks, that’s just daft, they’ve always existed since the Bible, and always will, just using different channels, can’t get much snarkier than the Free Masons or Ku Klux Klan, or Christians burning witches.
My two pennies worth.
Leave a Comment