So, a while back I posted on social media's interactions with the pragmatists. Unfortunately I had to repost to get the comments feature to work. In the meantime my friend Austin posted his comment to my thoughts on his blog. I wanted to keep this conversation going here on my blog, hence this post:
Austin,
What I’m hearing is that innovation will keep growing, which
we all know to be true, so pragmatists just need to suck it up and get with the
program. That is also true, although it doesn’t respond to my initial point.
Pragmatists are by nature risk averse. They can’t afford the
risk because it will hurt them, their career, or their company. Because of this
they will not pick up a product unless they are confident it will fit their
needs. They also won’t use a tool unless they are certain it will make them
money. (I put a bit at the end about uncertainty) Currently, that concern is not
yet resolved. This is what is required as a whole product.
It turns out that pragmatists are also the majority of the
money in the world, working in the biggest companies, making the biggest
decisions (hence the need for certainty).
I understand that innovation will keep going. It’s an engine
that clearly will never stop, especially in the realm of social media. But I
also know there is another force keeping acceptance low. My point was that
social media has not reached the point yet where large companies and pragmatists
in general are willing to take the risk to spend their resources on it yet.
They won’t be able to make that move until they see something they are
confident in, i.e. a whole product.
My point is that social media has not, as a whole, reached
the point yet where they can guarantee a solution-even though some features may
have (i.e. facebook for social applications, etc.) Once they can guarantee
a solution to a problem we face that has commercial value, then, and only then,
will the bulk of the decision makers in the business world get on board with
it. Currently the only thing social media can guarantee is that you can get
attention through it. We also know that sometimes that attention can be monetized,
but as anyone in the social media world knows, you can’t bet on a viral video.
In the same way we have no way of guaranteeing that a company will get a
paycheck if they use social media. No one has consistently proven it, although I
am certain they will in the very near future.
I am not saying any specific tool has to be proven. We know
that Twitter works; we even know mostly how it works, and that it has potential.
We know how Facebook can be used to drive awareness and can even house some businesses. We know that Youtube has
been a successful tool to building revenue. Each of those tools a pragmatist is
likely to pick up for its specific purpose. But where is the path
to success? We have a ton of empirical data, but few models, proofs,
or methods, and the data we do have is somewhat inconclusive. Clearly nothing has been proven yet. We clearly aren’t using social
media to its full potential.
Let me get one thing clear. It isn’t that I won’t use social
media. I’m not holding out, and I certainly will apply it to uses as I see fit,
but we have not gotten to the point where we can use it as a guaranteed money
maker...yet.
Once it is proven out, once we have a process that we can
rely on for success, then the bulk of the market will follow. I love what you
said about Apple, it is right on point. The reason Apple does so well is
because it gives out whole products—exactly what a pragmatist requires. Their
reward seems to be in the form of the bulk of the market share going to them,
the proven, stable, market leader. Do not read this as that their products don’t
have problems, just that they were able to offer a fully proven and accepted product.
Now, I anticipate a reaction about the need for certainty. I
read what you said about companies failing if they are not able to adapt. This
is totally true. Being able to act in the face of uncertainty is a mark of many
great leaders.
For pragmatists, uncertainty needs to be faced with as much
clarity as possible though. It’s all about weighing risks. Risk takers
generally fall into the visionary category in the model described, whereas being
risk averse is a quality of these pragmatists. This does not mean they don’t
take risks, they just weigh them differently. They tend to be much more
thorough or deliberate when weighing options and then tend to make sure their
decision is as clearly illuminated as possible before finally making a decision.
Yes, it is true that they will lean away from a risk when it is present, but taking
risks is clearly a part of life.
Neither group is wrong for acting the way they do; it’s just
a different approach. According to the way things work out in this tornado
model, the visionaries will always have a bit more technology, but the
pragmatists won’t let themselves be left behind. It’s all part of weighing the
risks. Pragmatists are willing to be a bit behind if it means they can let the
visionaries and techies work all the kinks out, decide which product is best
though votes in the form of dollars, and through this tell the pragmatists who
the most stable contender (i.e. the market leader) is.
Your line about not being able to comment on my blog is right
on point. I did nothing more than give my blog a name and then post, yet the comments link was not there. It turns out I didn't need to change anything. All I had to do is repost, and the comments link is now available.
No comments:
Post a Comment