Social Media Delusions of the McBiz Era
By Jason Moriber • Jun 9th, 2009 • Category: Insight & AnalysisI was chatting with blogger Francine McKenna on social media messaging/communications and its relationship to ROI and I had a revelation! Social media is playing out (with virtual currency i.e. “social capital”) many of the business strategies of the last four decades in response to the “breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreements” (1). Basically, people with money shifted focus from the local to the global, investing anywhere they could turn a quick and mucho-lucrative profit. Slow growth? Pshaw! Capital wants to double itself. This path was hugely adopted over this current decade, which I call the McBiz Era.
In social media, however, since there is less “real” money in play (time and effort vs. $dollars in investment) being “spent” within an immense amount of uncharted waters, delusions are freely adopted (mermaids!) and invisible corruptions (like undertows) are pulling folks all over the ocean. There IS great value in social media, I’m a firm believer and have data to support my beliefs (innovation, connection, and yes, new business), still, there are many layers to this onion, and some pointed symptoms that poke dangerously against the membrane, but yet without the force to pop the whole bubble.
In the financial sector this change has taken forty years to develop (and with the current recession, possibly fail). Twenty years ago a business could allow itself 5-10 years to make money relying on the “patient” capital of investors and bankers. Now most have two quarters to one year to produce or fail. This spawns business models aimed at immediately serving (conquering) the world, a McBiz i.e. Google, Twitter, Facebook (act local, think global). They follow in the dinosaur footprints of TimeWarner, Disney and McDonalds on a global path. The former pushes a PR agenda to keep an appearance of lean and mean: all it takes is 3 people, an idea, and an internet connection to start a McBiz (YouTube formed at a barbeque?, Twitter on a napkin?). This fuels more delusional business models while catering to impatient capital which seeks more McBiz.
Within the social media arena (echo-chamber) impatient capital is manifesting itself as a “behavior” (need results now!) instead of “returns” (show me the money). Without a strong business (too big to fail) already in place (i.e. Best Buy or Zappos who are now using social media), revenues (Google made money from the get-go, right?), or good backing (oh Twitter!) its a long haul, and a potentially devastating path to take. Some entrepreneurs are leveraged to the hilt.
The social media delusion of the McBiz era manifests itself via personal branding: individuals seek to have ever-expanding “influence” (investment) by growing huge contact/friend/follower lists (returns) on social networks. The social media space enables virtual growth in place of revenue growth (social capital) with a belief that the ROI will be shared influence (scratching backs?). But the %’s are low (inactive accounts, visibility, resonation) so the social media player needs more more more. This envelops the users, infesting many great ideas with scalability pangs; I want my message re-tweeted, I want my idea to go global NOW, I want more friends.
Some players see the the bubble bursting and seek to stake a claim and cash in their social capital chips for hard currency. The current models I see being adopted for social media monetization are based on driving those lists of friends to old-school cash-registers:
1. Sell tickets to an event or a conference
2. Sell a book
3. Sell consulting
4. Sell ads to match my content
5. Sell subscriptions to premium content
Soon we will all be doing one of the above (if not already, I’m obviously a consultant), yet it’s the purveyors of the products (Amazon?) who will reap the bigger rewards (I’m using my Mac, Wordpress and Twitter to develop and distribute this message).
As an example, the veritable Social Media Club (of which I’m a co-founder of the local chapter here in Indy) is now monetizing the chapters via “boot camps.” I have no issue with these folks trying to find sustaining support for their efforts, who doesn’t want that! BUT is the pay-out worth the investment to date? How many hours has the SMC put into building chapters? Do they make that value back? How do you define this value?
Does it matter? Did Best Buy gain new sales from Twitter or just from the PR they gained from using Twitter? Will Twitter ever make their investors money back, or will it take a sale to a larger company who knows how to monetize the old fashioned way, by earning it?
Or is it all intangible? Un-trackable? What are you gaining from social media, and is it worth the time/effort you’re putting into it?
Be wary of the mermaids, don’t get caught in the undertow.
——
endnote:
(1) Richard Sennett. The Culture of the New Capitalism, Yale University Press, 2006. Pgs 37-38.
Jason Moriber is a veteran product/project/marketing manager, underground artist/musician, and online community developer, Jason expertly builds/produces/manages clients' projects, programs, and campaigns.
Follow me on twitter http://twitter.com/jelefant
Email this author | All posts by Jason Moriber
Great post. The correlation between the financial sector’s sudden interest in community platforms (early 2000s) and the failed Bretton Woods agreement was revelatory. Also shows itself in the decline of music, arts, literary arenas – conglomerates dictating culture instead of the other way around. There is plenty of room in this arena for creativity and authenticity. And for defining markets. And relevance in a limited reach. Not everyone needs to know everything all the time. Isn’t there some kind of crowd logic… the Bystander Effect, that could be applied here. So many people watching, but no one is doing anything… useful.
Thanks for the shout-out, Jason. I think the lack of patience to realize the potential of a business model is directly correlated to the materialistic culture we live in. I’m no ascetic. I like my Jimmy Choos. And nice big comfy hotel rooms. But I think expecting that, counting on that, feeling like your life is a failure if you can’t achieve what you perceive everyone else is achieving is a recipe for disaster, personally and professionally. I rode home with a cab driver, a refugee from Uganda today. I had just been in an amazing building in downtown Chicago, a global law firm HQ, eating fancy cheese, drinking good wine and taking in a spectacular view. And then this cab driver, tells me he expects nothing, prays for nothing but patience and peace of mind and then God provides what God decides.
I have patience. But I am also a realist. Are many of those who want and expect too much, too soon, for no money or effort down being both impatient and unrealistic?
You’ve pretty much summed it up. “Dont get caught in the undertow” “Be wary of the mermaids”.
I like the approach (besides who doesn’t love allusions to greek mythology). In our world, there are lot of Ulysses’ – only most of them lack the ethos of the real thing.
I believe in transparency and authenticity (although Im not a Nazi about it and never will be). Your monetization list is interesting. Clearly some people are pretty open about their motives such as yourself, myself included – we’re in the business of marketing, and work with social media as a strategic tool. Then there’s others that have written books and extended their aura online. Even more interesting are what I like to refer to as the cloud players. There’s a cloud of smoke around them – marketing themselves on the shoulders of great causes, furthering the usage of social media, their agenda unclear for the most part – until boom – aha its a conference or a training session. Now look – monetization is key. If we want passionate people to do good work – they need to get paid or find patrons (see eric kass right?). Its cool. I’m just saying be open about it if someone asks.
In the case of social media club – this wasn’t made clear to us when we started it – that this was the agenda. In any case, perhaps the concept of people congregating around a strategic tool may ultimately be a vain hope. People need more than that. They need something that appeals to a higher or lower instinct.
Not sure I get all the Bretton Woods, McBiz arguments – but this I understand – its cool to make money but be cool about pointing out that the reason behind your passion. Then again, in the good ol’ US of A – it is really necessary to make that disclaimer? I think it is.