Intimidated by the velocity of change? Another way to stay focused

“Most of us feel lost in the dust kicked up by the pace of change,” says Nicco Mele, a self-declared IT nerd who memorizes poetry in his spare time. He has been recognized as one of America’s ‘best and brightest’ by Esquire Magazine.

In his book The End of Big, Mr. Mele says, “We don’t yet have an adequate vocabulary to talk about what is happening.” He adds, “Our End of bigpresent-day technology collapses time, distance, and other barriers. You often hear ‘social’ used in connection with technology – social media, social business, social sharing – but the consequences of radical connectivity on institutions are anything but social: they are disruptive.”

This disruption is felt acutely in academia and more generally in the knowledge economy. A popular blogger or intelligent contributor to Wikipedia can gain significant authority regardless of his participation in the academia.

Mele says, “From a purely reputational view, the Internet may think that a Wikipedia user who goes by the name Hoppyh knows more about Abraham Lincoln than famed historian Doris Kearns Goodwin.” He explains that Hoppyh has made more than 1,339 contributions to the Wikipedia page on Lincoln. Kearns Goodwin hasn’t made any. And, even if she would start adding information to the Lincoln page tomorrow, Wikipedia wouldn’t give her any special status, observes Mele.

If you are a professional Subject Matter Expert, should you now be making regular contributions to Wikipedia?

Should you join the 164 million or so bloggers who are sharing their views on the Internet?

Does it matter that your clients may have instant access to information from reputable sources that may contradict your own views?

It’s comforting to hear that smart people like Mele feel intimidated by the velocity of change.

Meantime, busy professionals may want to take comfort in the old saying: do one thing and do it well. Or, as Google would say: It’s best to do one thing really, really well. In other words, pick and choose where you will put your energy to build profile online. It may be a blog, an e-zine, Google+, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, or any other platform – but, most likely, it can’t be all of them.

Gradual introduction of new brand may flush “Wow! Factor” down the drain

Have you noticed the improvised signs popping up in public bathroom? (see illustration!)

With the gradual switch to electronic toilet flushing, we seem to be a bit confused these days about bath031room etiquette. To flush or not to flush? The slow introduction of new technology can have unintended consequences.

How could this possibly be related to introducing a new visual brand identity – a new logo?

In 2008, with the launch of the Beijing Olympic Games, Bell launched a new corporate brand. Except, someone apparently decided it was either too expensive or logistically impossible to re-paint hundreds of service vehicles – billboards on wheels, all of them. In fact, the Bell vans on the road undermined expensive billboard advertisements along the road. The “wow factor” of the new brand was compromised, I thought.

More recently, a neighborhood non-profit in Toronto repeated the Bell story. The charity adapted its name and introduced a new logo. The move was overdue and well done. Again, I noticed that the organization’s vehicles driving through my neighbourhood still carried the agency’s original logo and name. So did a large sign displayed on their building.This continued for at least a full year.

Unfortunately, reinventing an organization’s visual identity is an expensive proposition. Before an organization considers going ahead with the project, it may be wise to make a complete list of absolutely every customer touch point: biz cards, baseball caps, vehicles, social media platforms, displays, printed marketing collateral, packaging materials and, likely, many other items. Can the organization introduce the new logo everywhere within a reasonable amount of time? If not, what items need to be prioritized and why?

Some other questions an organization may wish to ask: Have we really done an honest cost/benefit analysis for the brand project? Does it make more sense to make this change during an upcoming anniversary year and build some general PR around the new brand launch? How much would it hurt to wait a few more years so budget can be set aside to cover all associated costs? (Meantime, existing marketing materials can be used up or re-produced in much smaller quantities.)

A gradual introduction of a new brand identity may be necessary to spread costs, but it can threaten the very reasons for doing the exercise in the first place.