A new form of government?

Over dinner last night with a few friends, we were bemoaning the politicazation and partisanship of the US media. Too often, citizens choose to consume only media that reinforces their own views and therefore have little opportunity to hear the true debate that should shape the political landscape and determine elections. Instead, spin-doctors and pundits from each political stripe immediately (post-debate) deconstruct the event, showing how their candidate "won", until the original event is forgotten, and the analysis becomes the reality.

"It's as if it's no longer a democracy at all. It's become a whole new form of government that needs a new name..." my friend begin.

"A Media-cracy" I blurted out.

I was chagrined to later find out that I had not been the first to coin this new word, it was already registered at Unwords.

Catch up post (3/22/2005)

Mifos Update

Although the RDVP program has officially been on spring break, it's still been a busy time for me. One of my Grameen colleagues, Ericka Lock, came down from Seattle for a couple days, as she, Steve Mushero, and I started combing through the Business Requirements Document, looking for ambiguities or things that weren't specified clearly enough.

The process continued for a week while I was in Seattle, though we did take a couple of days out to give our technical advisory board an update and gather information about the possibility of outsourcing the development work, probably to a firm overseas, in an area of the world where microcredit is actually done. Even after two solid days of plowing through a list of open issues, many still remained, so we’ve continued the process in the exemplary manner of a distributed team: two members in Seattle, a third in the Seattle area (but at home), one at Berkeley, and one at Stanford. For one of the meetings today, we added another continent, with Ericka calling in (via Skype) from Peru.

http://www.Namaste-direct.org

In addition to the Mifos activities, I sat in on a board meeting for http://www.Namaste-direct.org a microcredit organization started by Bob Graham. His vision is to use the power of the internet to attract donors and allow them to have a much more detailed view of the impact that their donation makes, by having their money directly fund a “Group of 100” (women borrowers) in places in Guatemala like Ixil or Villa Canales or
Chimaltenago. Team captains (primarily college interns from the US) will visit the groups, record the stories of the borrowers and share them with the donors that funded the group, giving donors a real sense of how their money was invested. I'm curious to see if some of the internet marketing techniques that I learned at Vividence.com will help boost online contributions and conversion rate.

MicroMentor

I also had a chance to meet David Rand, the Founder of http://www.micromentor.org, an online service to match micro-entrepreneurs in the US (for now) with mentors who can provide business expertise, such as advice in strategic planning, marketing, fundraising, networking. Micro-entrepreneurs self-register, mentors register on the site, and when approved, can search through the profiles of the entrepreneurs, and contact anonymously (via the site) the entrepreneur. If the entrepreneur (who sees a "blinded" mentor profile) agrees to the match, the site exchanges the contact information. After a two year pilot, Micromentor re-vamped last year (moving to the model just described) and is growing in a controlled fashion while they prove out the model.

RDVP Class: Mitra and Greg (3/7/2005)

Iranian Teacher's Network

Mitra gave an update on the Iranian Teachers' Network, showing a prototype and describing some of the recent thinking she'd done around content, the opportunity for teachers to earn money by selling lesson plans, and the challenges for fundraising. She got some pointers to potential corporate sponsors who might be interested.

Prototyping

Greg Wolff gave a talk about prototyping. The key insights were that:

1. You start with a period of observation, and record measurements of metrics that you will want to impact.
   
2. You create a few testable hypotheses (1 or 2 primary, and 2 to 3 dependent) about how to impact those metrics
   
3. Only then do you choose the technologies which will allow you to test those hypotheses as quickly as possible.
   

He encouraged the involvement of ethnographers in the first stage of observation, pointing out that simple questionnaires are insufficient, because people are bad at accurately reporting what they do. (I can corrobrate that from my experience at Vividence.)

The business people construct the hypotheses, though get the buy-in of key stakeholders from the research and technical teams.

The technical team is given the task of choosing technologies to test the hypotheses quickly. Since this is a prototype, the eventual production cost is irrelevant. You need to confirm that you are building the right thing.

Greg presented a simple graphical form to help enforce the division and clarity of thinking. Observations and measurements formed the left leg of an arch, the technologies to be used the right leg, and the bridge between them is the hypotheses.
It's a simple idea, but one I think will be effective for keeping conversations on track and reducing the scope of prototypes to the minimum required to test the hypothesis.

RDVP Seminar: Julie McHenry (3/2/2005)

[Note: I've fallen behind again on my blogging, too much going on. So I'll revert to somewhat less well-written/organized entries, on the assumption that it's better to get SOMETHING up than continue to postpone until I have time to do it well.]

Julie McHenry is a Public Relations (PR) professional. She took her interest in journalism and background in marketing (with an MBA) to the field of PR, and worked with Microsoft starting in 1983 (pre-IPO). In 1990, she moved to the Valley, working with companies like Symantec, Convergys, and Intuit. Currently the founder/principal of Communications Insight, she spoke to the RDVP group on the importance of PR and building relationships with journalists. She talked about the difference between paid content (advertising) and editorial content, noting that a good PR person can help shape what journalists write about in the editorial sections, though can never completely control the message. If you want total control, buy an ad.

She encouraged the fellows to think about their projects in terms of what is newsworthy: unique, innovative, or an innovative twist on a familiar model. By building a relationship with a journalist, providing them with interesting news over time, acting as a source for them, they are more likely to listen when you have a message that you would like to convey to the world.

In prepping for a press interview, she suggested having 2 or 3 big points that you want to be sure to make, as well as a collection of factoids that you can throw in to make things interesting and quoteable. She is a big fan of analogies, saying that they're a good way to convey difficult concepts in a way that people will understand. She discouraged us from requesting questions in advance (saying it makes you look paranoid and sets up a confrontational tone) and to request changes in pre-press copy only if there's something seriously wrong: the reporter doesn't want to see your grammatical changes, and you shouldn't try to re-write things to make them seem more positive.

She mentioned the power of an advisory board to lend credibility to a new organization, and pointed out that having people from complementary disciplines provides a stronger board overall. When the advisory board is in place, along with a website and some funding or donors, only then does it make sense to launch the organization. Sending a press release to PR Newswire, Marketwire, Businesswire, or Ascribe (a new non-profit newswire) will make sure that your news gets across the desk of nearly every relevant journalist (though the good ones will already know about you.) For more targeted news, you may be better off calling a single journalist for a publication that reaches your target market. With an exclusive scoop, the journalist is more likely to be interested in writing a story rather than competing with everyone else who picks something off the wire. She said that a journalist will typically take a cold call, though email is often better, and if that email starts with a flattering reference to a previous story by the author, it's likely to get a better reception. Also, being aware of their deadlines is courteous.

She talked a bit about the PR strategy of "influencing the influencers", which was practiced effectively by Regis McKenna and his firm (including Julie) with clients such as Apple, Intel, and Genentech. Since technology is a reference sell (along with most other major purchases) you should influence opinion leaders, possibly even giving away your product to them ("seeding the market") to generate word of mouth among the general public. Finding and influencing the right 50 people can be the difference between a smashing success or a luke warm one.

In response to a question from Carlos, she said that it's better to "ride the wave" (be associated with today's hot topic) than try to operate counter to it. But you should seek a new angle on the hot topic, so you're not another "Me too" story.

Julie also offered her advice on how to choose a PR agency. Choosing one of appropriate scale was her first recommendation: a new non-profit is probably best off with a solo practicioner, while a larger multi-national company will obviously require a larger firm. Establishing a good relationship with the person is key, and you want to find someone with whom you can have a high bandwidth conversation--that is, someone who "gets" your ideas and speaks your vocabulary. You should ask for references from current clients, and talk with them. You can also ask for 2 or 3 primary contacts (journalists) that the agent relies on, and email them to ask for the effectiveness of the agent.