The Root Trend

Why Privacy controls will matter more soon to everyone (What our shared reactions to uncertainty tell us about social trending issues and changing business policy)

3 17 10: a further reading list of links will be added to this as a trend thread to follow development over the next couple of months. Dave

There are a number of posts waiting to be finished in my "Root Trend" folder. The Toyota brand quality thread (the last post before this one) has been fascinating to watch as I believe it will be a longer term issue. It is not ending; it is probably mid-course or only beginning now. The "why?" attached to that statement is because of rapidly changing nature of social mood right now. Social mood is a primary social trending impulse and in the case of the universe of brands in the US, it is an important area to watch right now. Brands, in general, need to be wary right now looking for both new challenges and opportunities. Why? Shared values amongst Americans are changing and will continue to change more quickly. This can be seen affecting our shared perceptions related to brands where the competitive environment is in flux somehow. As social mood changes what we pay attention to changes.

The very same can be said for individuals in the digital environment right now. How so?

The issue of Privacy was growing large several years ago (2001-2003). Then it began shrinking away from the headlines in 2004. This could be a longer discussion but my intention tonight is to simply lay out one aspect of the landscape of social trends we are witnessing now as they relate to privacy (as a shared value).

Privacy is looked upon as an issue of relevance to all people and every business in the US (and the world too but I focus on the specific social mood as it relates the the US right now)

The birth of the new universe of social media tools is about sharing through user generated content. It tells us a lot about how we view content and its relevance in our lives. Social media has shown us clearly how 1) it is not a fad, 2) it is about specialization of focus, and 3) The era of Choice must be served by enterprises (as it relates to content dissemination). In order to see how shared values related to privacy issues (on many levels) are expressed requires only a little bit more discernment.  

When we (groups of people, on average) view the uncertain events of the future in a more optimistic manner, we are more inclined to share broadly with expectations that lead to more inclusiveness connecting us to wider groups of people.  When we, (in our social aggregations seen as a moving average) view the future with a more pessimistic tinge, we share less freely, or more selectively. This is a patterned social behavior and from a this larger perspective we can always be seen to be in a period of social expansion or social correction that expresses one of these two states. The values expressed today by most social networking enterprises (related to privacy issues) are positioned as if we are in a period of social expansion. When looking at the longer term time frames we are clearly in a period of social correction and eventually changes (related to privacy concerns) will be demanded by customers, and corrected for by these companies.

CNET published a discussion about privacy yesterday where Mark Zuckerberg (Face Book founder)was quoted as saying privacy is a generational issue and therefore seen differently by Y's and Xer's compared to most Boomers. His position is that 'it is different this time' for today's younger digital networkers. I disagree with his basic assumption and by doing so I am generally predicting that the shared values in the US towards privacy will re-emerge and come to dominate issues faced by digital enterprises across the US in the years directly ahead. Attitudes towards Privacy are about trust in a sense and I have written about how to see trust related social trending issues in a previous post. It all boils down to social mood and where it is headed in general. For example: During the past two years we've witnessed dramatic changes to the financial landscape. An important part of these events occurred because risk aversion became an important new shared value in our society. You don't need to think too hard to see how important risk aversion has been as an underlying causative issue in our economy.

As our shared values evolve in the groups that we attach ourselves to we can reduce these changes to some form of optimism or pessimism toward the uncertainty of the future.This is the essence of social mood.

At some point in the not too distant future, this shared pessimism will manifest as a greater need for privacy, both personally and for enterprises too. These are not separate issues but, in fact, directly connected.

As this need for privacy reasserts itself, it will likely be incremental. Many businesses that began by willingly sharing our information about ourselves will retreat from this posture to a less all-inclusive format. Membership in many platforms was often free to everyone and that seemed to serve both the business and the customers as the platforms grew. At some point "we" will require incremental "costs"(requirements) for inclusion in our networks as groups of people begin to recognize the importance of prudence related to this changing shared value.

Instead of viewing this as a prediction, consider it a behavioral pattern to watch for as it expresses itself. I believe Mark Zuckerberg is making a mistake when he cites a generational factor in the willingness to share personal information more freely. Every generation is indeed different in some ways. However, the variable attached to shared values related to privacy matters are affected by the always changing social mood. Business enterprises will eventually respect this fact and are sure to change going forward. Right now, it may seem like it is not that way at all. Allow for change because it is coming. 

The underlying issue (inclusion vs. exclusion) discussed in this post is given more thorough discussion in a few areas in this book pgs 230-235. It's worth buying if this subject is relevant to your business.

(or you can start with this DVD)

I still see Face Book as a somewhat faddish enterprise (even if they have 350 million users)but the larger digital networking trend is a permanent part of our social infrastructure. This era of Choice, as it relates to media, is about putting the consumer of content in control. Your customers should not trip over your business model because it is convenient for you not to find innovative solutions.  On the other hand, the intellectual property concerns of many media companies may benefit from this same changing set of shared values. The important thing to remember is that these circumstances change over time and how issues related to values toward privacy oscillate between extremes. For now, it is fair to say we are nearer one extreme and likely to head smartly in the next direction for a few years+.  How can an enterprise use this? The most obvious answer is to use the new two-way nature of marketing communications to stay in tune with your key constituencies. And while this last suggestion is obvious to anyone doing it now, using social mood to anticipate trending issues is still ahead of its time. Go for it.

This post belongs on my media blog but for now it is worth taking this deeper look through the Root Trend. Dave

further reading on issues surrounding this collective set of values:

posted: 3 17 10  How Privacy Vanishes online  NYT

Social trends reflect the polarity of shared values

This is not just a blog about explaining social mood or some me-too effort at what other people call socionomics.  I have considerable regard and respect for those efforts.   They are distinct in many ways from what I am doing**.  Having spent years within earshot of those on Madison Avenue and having always appreciated behavioral science, this approach to "seeing" social mood is, at the very least, a required effort for two reasons: First, the goal of any good science effort is to break down an area of interest into the basic structural components so that the general understanding surrounding the subject has greater utility.  Second, the general approach I suggest is really an adaptation of watching those use the original tool from market observations that generated this subject of social herding relative to social mood. 

In my own thinking, behavioral expressions by groups (markets) of people that exhibit polarity are critical to better understanding of how to use these ideas in a practical setting.  When I distill the ideas I've collected over four years on a cork board, this is where I am at currently. It's not quite clear enough yet, but, it's getting closer:

Social trends are threads of shared memory as they relate to key (shared) values.They have form and follow a path.  Shared social values have a base polarity that swing over different time horizons from one relative extreme to another in a manner that reflects (some degree of trend) of the larger social mood and these influence social trends we see around us.  Trend lines visible in data driven depictions are evidence of the shared memory of crowds (markets) and can (when properly used) be early evidence of how changing shared values will impact specific markets. This is the usable aspect of what I call the Root Trend or (the behavioral shadow projected by us as a result of our natural expression of social mood). How we value many things changes as social mood changes.

Stated up in the mast of the blog too: This matters to marketers. 

Alas, it remains (for now) a little too hip for the room. And while changing social mood may assist the current mindset by raising the need to know during the next phase of the social correction, I also am endeavoring here to offer another very specific example of how polarity among shared values within trending issues can guide outcomes.

The media thread in the right column became its own blog 18 months ago and is also a developing book. I've mentioned this before and am still hard at work on it.  (It's definitely not in danger of being late though 2010 is a firm goal.)

In the meantime, here's a specific example of an important social trend with polarity that we may all watch develop. 

Two posts ago I wrote:

More on the link between social mood and consumer behavior: the most basic social expressions

In this post I discussed the polarity of trust from the group perspective. (You really do have to see that post, and most everything here, from the perspective of groups or else it can be misinterpreted.) As social animals we naturally employ trust as a tool but, as social mood changes how we specifically apply the tool changes with the polarity being differing degrees of cooperation and control. "Cooperation" and "control" are the polarity in the social trust trend and so how groups of people express this polarity depends upon the degree of trend of the larger social mood and how much change occurs in this central social state (of Americans). 

Let's take it a step further and identify one more trend with polarity of expression in two dimensions. 

Even if you are not in the media business you cannot help be aware of how much trouble the industry is having because of the disruptive effects of the internet upon the basic business model. Businesses are social tools we create to deliver both personal value and social utility.  There are two trends running through the media business and social sphere right now that may seem different but they are really different expressions of the same core value.  IP or intellectual property rights are, according to media companies (content businesses), under siege. Technology has conspired to un-protect their business model when it remained naturally protected for many decades. Adaption to this disruption has come slowly and in the meantime profitability has declined. Many blame what they call theft of their IP.  I submit it is a natural reaction to supply and demand issues where we are collectively re-pricing the socially recognized value of content. (admittedly, it is hard to use a macro trend to square any one experience)

The second trend to recognize is the erosion of personal privacy of individuals in the US due to this same technology expansion. This trend became a big issue at the social nadir in 2003 and 2004 then it began receding. It will come back as the larger social trend is expressed and, in time, we will see the IP trend as a business expression of the same general trend that the personal privacy trend represents. The core shared value in this case is how we value Ownership rights (towards intangibles). To me, this is the key to using what I call the root trend. Identifying social trending issues using changing shared values (that have obvious polarity) can also help determine what degree of trend carries what implications (historically). Using our history as a guide, we can pair developing issues to likely directional outcomes over larger chunks of time. By approaching trending issues from this broad angle, it is less about prediction and more about understanding the present social momentum better (in a larger/longer framework)..."what really matters to the market".

It is my conviction that many businesses get lost in the white noise of the moment in order to service their immediate needs and can lose touch with their most relevant constituencies by trying to maximize the moment. Since I know enough about the media business to appreciate how this happened, I offer an example of why this trend viewing method should be learned and applied for better strategic outcomes in times of social change. (like right now)

The typical publicly owned media business serves three masters. The share holder, the advertiser or sponsor, and the consumer of their content. The conflict of interest is too much in a changed world with a digital environment. Fundamentally, you can say that there is balance missing from the business structure. Trend-wise, you can say that the new trend where consumers of content exert their need for Choice is paramount (The Era of Choice is media's dominant trend). The psychology of the market for content tells us, if we listen closely, that the social trend is more powerful than the legal issues surrounding sharing content (Media is a higher order social tool).   Structurally, the market for content is forever changed absent significant new technology. 

So, where does that leave us right now?! Ownership rights. Eventually the IP concerns of media companies will be somehow paired with personal privacy concerns and the market for content will respond with solutions that address these needs as one trend when it matters enough in the macro social environment. <The fact that it will is a benefit of seeing what is called the degree of trend as it relates to aggregate social mood.>

This observation highlights why trend studies must focus upon societal boundaries. Ownership issues, when they arise, will be discussed as they relate to the laws in a specific country.I also suspect that the laws of different states in the years ahead will matter to both people and businesses a great deal too. Google's China issues this week are a great example. (The third link below is good for these general kinds of discussions)

For now, just try to see how issues like personal privacy concerns and IP can be two differing expressions of the same shared value, and why this issue may become as central to people in the US now as it was 233 years ago when we created our founding agreement.

Large periods of social correction are all about groups focusing on those issues <shared values> that matter most and bind a people together.They must be changed or reaffirmed.  Shared values, in a social context, guide us on how to see trend issues more clearly in markets of people.   Dave

**ps. After reading this post you might wonder again where this may be going. Eventually, this work can and will be broken into small enough pieces so as to create a distinct subject called social trending dynamics. Eventually, many good things can grow from that effort.

as always, here are links for those interested in looking deeper at where these ideas began:

Socionomics  by Robert R Prechter 

The DVD

Progress in socionomics

The original observations that lead to socionomics

Much ado about nothing? (Getting clearer on what "Free" means)

There are many references in the media universe this month to Chris Anderson's new book,  Free.  <Wired mag link for overview>  Chris has interesting ideas and is usually a good read.   I've not read the book quite yet but the Wired magazine article discusses the broad ideas.  Yesterday, I read a thoughtful reprise from Malcolm Gladwell in this month's New Yorker. 

I am not sure how either would respond to this perspective but, the developing social mood offers us valuable insight on "free" indirectly that I have addressed in a series of posts on the (iroM) media site lately.  I'd like to broaden this thought significantly here, while keeping this short.

The word "free" inspires a specific idea in my mind related to the digit 0 (zero).  Free implies it costs no money but, the use by marketers often evades the reality that while requiring no money, there are meaningful other requirements.  Does this seem like too fine a point in how they discuss the topic? The authors might think so. So might the producers of various content in the world of old media but, in the months and years ahead I figure that anyone using the term "free" is more likely to be using outmoded scales for a world that has gone well beyond this old way of seeing. "Free" requires we use a new ruler to measure its subtleties, otherwise it is increasingly likely to be considered a partial (one-sided)truth:

In years worth of notes related to social trending dynamics, social mood's basic message to me is that as social mood changes, how we (collectively) value things changes. This means things of all kinds and especially those not related to money. I see our shared values of all kinds changing very rapidly these days as the social correction progresses. That is the point of social corrections. We must go through an experiential group process of sharing and deciding what we (Americans), collectively, value most <what really matters> and continue on with our smaller group endeavors in a manner that reflects those agreed upon shared core values. Whether the bulk of the process is conscious or unconscious is less relevant than what actually happens. And while not all social corrections are as pervasive as this one, that distinction is a topic for another post. Instead, let's consider the example media enterprises are offering us right now and compare it to the broader social universe as implied by the notion that businesses are being forced to offer so much for free digitally these days.

Media posts on better metrics    Here, Here, and Here

During May through July, I posted three parts (links above) about why one of the immediate top priorities at old media enterprises, is to design and employ more detailed and sophisticated metrics that describe consumer engagement with content. It's not just a good idea that it be done. It is essential. New media companies have metrics that characterize what is best described as a revolution in marketing information related to consumer engagement. The old Don Imus-ism of "I Talk, You Listen" is a worn out pair of shoes seeing its last wearings on older demographics more resistant to change. 

There is a deeper implication to this particular period  of "free" unfolding in the digital universe that is worth seeing from a broader perspective. The best analogy is to compare it to when the electron microscope came into existence and our shared consciousness of the world changed. When this happened an entire new world of structures was revealed, as if they were brand new, and immediately inspired new ways of seeing and creating with regard to the new structural reality.(though it had always existed)

So my conclusion is simple. I believe "free", as it is being discussed, is today almost always an oversimplification and that marketers need to make much finer distinctions during this new technology driven Era of Choice as to what Free really means.  In the same way that metrics describing engagement with content must now become more sophisticated with a finer focus,  so too must our appreciation of what "cost" means to consumers.  For more than a generation the formula for marketers talking to consumers has been to roughly ignore any costs beyond those measured in dollars and cents unless it was an obvious inconvenience being removed and sold as added value.  Channels were more limited compared to today and by definition, so was the level of Choice available to consumers.

Think about two examples: Products that limit or add features and because of this they require consumer adjustments and exact incremental costs from consumers whether purchased or not (think cars). Then there's media content consumers waiting through long sets of commercials for what they hope will be worth it. These are very specific "costs" <read as a form of "uncertainty">that can be avoided today by incurring additional costs using technology. These kinds of costs are more often time oriented after initial purchases of simple technology. Feel free to see the new level of organization required on the personal level as a microcosm of the social reordering that is happening in the world of content monetization.

It is no surprise that all this is happening in a period of broad deflation in the American economy. The social correction dynamic is the highest order consideration in seeing trending. From there we may go on to see how during this period of deep social correction we are experiencing <collectively> deflation in many forms. Deflation is a psychological group state; one that implies specific needs than cannot be met by a bank adjusting interest rates.  Deflation is a mandate from us, to us, to prioritize core values and re-allocate social capital <and other kinds of capital> accordingly. This particular social correction is requiring a completely changed focus that will allow us to see small things much more clearly so that together we can become more efficient at a higher level.  Down the road, these efforts will take us another step in our collective union as a people...to engage in another period of social expansion once everything is in order.It is one giant process with many little components that parallel the larger process.

This is obviously worthy of a much longer post but free to me is something requiring exactness these days, and I do not think the discussion has been attempted yet, nor do I think the "free" many see today is thought of as the same "free" as those offering it.   Free, as it relates to content in the digital universe is an incredibly narrow perspective on what has been the most dramatic development in our nation's history. The white noise surrounding the discussion focuses mostly on negatives even when attempting to state them as positives. Social resources are being freed up because we can now be three of four times as efficient. I am certain blacksmith's felt the same way once upon a time as people stepped off of train cars in their town without the need for a sew set of horseshoes. Blacksmiths did not die off. Their creative skills were employed differently in a changed world and the mechanic was born.

Free is a very different kind of conversation for marketers in the presence of a digital universe. It requires precision and focus associated with broadly seeing a new permanent world of two way marketing communication conversations.  Ignoring non-monetary costs is no longer sensible if marketing is to be applied as an evolving quantitative discipline. With this changed perspective must come changes in how we value other things closely associated to both media and marketing best practices. All of this is the work of a social correction <in just one or two corridors of our complex society> and marketers must seize this perspective or risk missing a lot.  

Lastly, it is essential to remember this conversation is not a negotiation. No one needs to win or lose a point about "free". The Era of Choice is showing us how consumers of everything are in control like never before and that has to be respected....especially their perspective on what is free and what is not. Accepting this does not mean giving up valuable ground. Accepting this notion promises a wealth of insight and future prosperity. Dave

how we value things collectively changes with the developing social mood

When I list a must read story it is because when I view the details through the lens of social mood's changing influence upon how we collectively behave and I think there is an opportunity for profound insight.

In today's NYT story What is Free about Free Markets?

The implications in the article seem to suggest troubling long term issues embedded deep in our way of being American as we have come to know it in our lifetimes. Here's the payoff in seeing social mood (socionomics) for what it is and how it operates in our society and our economy. Seeing events through this lens does not promise easy answers but it does offer a better view of cause and effect in a time when blame is passed around like a party favor.

How We Value Things Changes with social mood. Not just strange and misunderstood financial derivatives. We are willing right now to forsake free markets to save us from unknown danger. Our shared perceived value of what free markets offers us (socially) has declined in the face of perceived danger.  The future is uncertain always and yet now we fear terrible things will result. Practical people might scream back at me "You fool!, The financial system is about to collapse!"  To that I ask the following: What was happening with regard to all of this just three years ago as many American flipped condos and measured their kitchens for granite counter tops? Plenty of very smart economists were writing about all of these excesses then but they were labeled perma-bears, Danny dooms, and pariahs, even. These days, anyone who tells "smart" people this was foreseeable, it is not only agreed with but, you are likely to be told 'why bother having the conversation'. Well, the value of free markets is a great reason among many!

Social mood, is part of our nature as it relates to social behavior when in large groups. We choose to focus on individual needs and wants <in our society> but how we behave, how we create, how (social) trends can best be seen, is through the lens of the developing social mood and the group dynamics that result from this perspective.

Check out this flow chart I posted a long while ago. It is a simplified visual interpretation of the foundation of socionomics called the wave principle. All of this is very relevant now. How we relate as individuals to this process is also very relevant to businesses and marketers because a changing social mood affects demand in the markets we serve. My new web site about media is just one example of how this can be applied specifically along with a providing healthy respect for free markets and what they can teach us about competing effectively...versus what managed markets taught us  re the media business during the past 70 years. Old media is crumbling because it was never prepared to compete widely. Stronger competitors make better products that sell for competitive prices. These are just a few of the many of the benefits free markets bestow upon a country.

If you run a business then consider this diagram. Understanding social mood will not make decisions for you but it will tell you better which questions matter most.    Dave

The breadth and depth of social mood is the utility to marketing management

I've added a new article link to the Good Reading section in the right hand column of the blog. It's a link to a Floyd Norris article in the NYT and he writes about financial matters. (A Little Pity, Please, For Lenders). Before you read the article, try seeing it through this perspective. 

The new national pastime of finger pointing, failures, cheats, and the lessons for marketers

I am republishing this December post with just a few updates and links as this trend thread is developing broadly and we can benefit by looking closer at what it says about changing the 'social condition'.  Today's Washington post has an excellent article titled  Ritual of Repentance
The Post-Scandal Litany of New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer Has Familiar Echoes
 

The Current Inflection Point in Social Mood is the Most Important Trend Change of Your Career

Inflation and Deflation are in a death match

Social mood is now changing at a very large degree of trend

Of the two statements above, the second of these matters much more than the first and chances are you've never read about the ever present dynamic of social mood and how it affects you in the markets you serve and the rest of your life. The following post is something I wrote to two people close to me; both of whom are in the path of two very industry specific, multi-generational trend changes ( I do not mention here) but especially in the general sense as offered through the perspective of 'the developing social mood'.

In the spirit of a blog, I can only post bites here and bites there, but this conversation is relevant to everyone, no matter who you are...follow along...

How We Value Things Changes #2

The chart, in the 'keep reading' section is a visual display of how I see social mood  relating to what is the ultimate process of the root trend. Yes, I use the name root trend in some ways like social mood but mostly as the process by which social mood exerts influence and is translated into indivdual action and especially patterns in consumer behavior. The chart was my first workable translation of why this is more than a series of esoteric observations and how it matters to marketers and decision makers.

Yes, a lot can be said for simply being abreast of current trends in consumer behavior but, when you add the larger dynamic of social mood and an appreciation for the degree of trend unfolding, there is the opportunity to find patterns and important subtlties where none existed before (except to the weathered & "tuned-in" professionals who can sense the changing tides in their industry). This work will help give it a name and a face. It also very clearly uses and at the same time parallels the observation used in The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. By using his stated three preconditions for a tipping point, amd together with an understanding of social mood, one can see aspects of consumer behavior from what is very likely, a better perspective.

How We Value Things Changes

This theme has emerged most prominent in my thinking in the area of social trending. Of course it is obvious but why things change is the point behind the blog and socionomics in general. It is worth discovering. This simple point, how we value things changes, has been the impetus of my work and is at the heart of the developing social mood. It is not one point to be covered in an article for those craving soundbites. Over time I will post on many differening subjects from this perspective. If you want to see it for yourself, you simply have to adjust you own thinking and expectations. Social mood, the root of most social trends, has always been present among us collectively and there are invariably many more ways to see expressions of it than we will discuss in these pages. Perhaps we can visualize many more expressions together.

Consider the following questions:

How much do houses cost these days? food? clothing? an average car? How much do they cost in dollars and how much do they cost in other measures of value? How do those values shift over long periods of time?

On a decade by decade basis what laws are changing....and how? 

How does our Federal and State governments prioritize their budgets?

What are the top five conversations most likely at a social gathering?

What do the headlines and front pages tell us about these changing values?

Changes in the aggregate social mood is at the root of all trending in society. It is as dynamic and three dimensional as any one living person yet it embodies all members of a society. Social mood is the result of ongoing human interaction and is naturally ocurring. Robert Prechter refers to it as an endognenous force and one that produces shared impulses that are distributed amongst all people in a society. I suggest you consider the trends discussed here in light of Malcolm Gladwell's tipping points in that the larger trending process must go through individual mechanical steps as it manifests across all relevant groups of association in a society.  This, over course is a fluid process as it happens. I beleive it is worth looking more closely provided this larger construct of social mood is the backdrop, otheriwse it may be too easily broken down into behavioral segments that obscure imporant meaning for marketers.

It is how we see ourselves as individuals but have a common link to the whole through a shared and unconscious set of behaviors that quietly and pervasively influence the final result of our collective activities.

The standard view that we are bombarded with everyday of our life tells us simply that we are individual reactive agents responding to events in the world around us constantly.  The socionomic perspective instructs us to consider how this thinking is misguided and in return for an honest effort over time to see how expressions of social mood correlate with social trending of all kinds, then we can begin to see (perhaps slowly), with incredible clarity, how trends reflect what is perhaps the most basic of human instincts. In the language of marketers, trending of all kinds can be seen in new light and many more discovered by understanding how to see differing trends. In this process trending will become seen as patterned social behavior, and this may be viewed in the same way we view flocking birds and schooling fish, and herding gazells. The trends we find using an understanding of social mood need not have great significance to them as all forms of social behavior have a significance, even if they are about a new cool kind of shoes to wear.   

How though does this suggest the point of this post?: How We Value Things Changes.