12.15.07
Posted in Uncategorized at 4:32 am by kevindjones
A response to how you measure and value attention from a friend.
“We measure things that are easy to measure about some media
like
- time on page, time on site
- click through rate
- conversion rate
- frequency of interaction
- responsiveness of interaction
- “lag”, whatever that is, but everyone knows what it is
In general, media that have small amounts of lag are good for
gaming, because you can play many small bets and iteratively
define a better result. As the amount of lag increases, the
attention games change, and you start to get out of the realm
of reality-based feedback and into the realm of ROI fictions,
and systems that have enormous expensive command and
control infrastructures.
it’s one thing to hack people’s attention about tomorrow if you
start working on it today, and something very different to plan
a campaign that results in their attention (or the fulfillment of
their desire) 6 or 12 or 18 or 120 months hence. from Ed Vielmetti who should get more attention for what he does.
Permalink
Posted in attentioneconomy, timeasvalue at 4:28 am by kevindjones
I asked a former business partner turned theologian if he’d consider being the consulting theologian on the Social Capital event we are holding in San Francisco in mid October next year. My work with this fellow earned both of us multiple millions, and changed our lives. He found my questions around the nature of value interesting but said he wasn’t sure if he had the time to be engaged. Here is my response about the nature of time, to my theologian, author and entrepeneurial friend.
Time as a scarce commodity is a cultural externality that comes to us thanks to markets. If we were just keeping time by the daily office rather than selling it we would not have this problem. Time as money is a problem of a monetary system that can eat anything, starting with the commons. We need a restrictive diet for the market some historically and theologically mediated form of shiboleths/ rules of market engagement/trading agreements and market regulations.
We need to create a space and value that space, which is not subject to purely numerical forms of value. Financial and narrative value need to both be on the balance sheet. I’m not suggesting a spiritual line item. I’m suggesting another system of accounting that incorporates a just Economia. The blessed community, do you buy a futures contract that says it’s going up? what’s the nature of that contract? how can theological and spiritual and economic language create some kind of useful rosetta stone?
Permalink
Posted in exchanges, producers, transparency, usergeneratedcurrency, attentioneconomy at 12:20 am by kevindjones
The power equations will be rewritten in the new version of social stock exchanges. It’s a merger of social value in a medium where the individual has asserted a new level of power. the intermediary’s role in an online exchange that treats people and the planet as of some intrinsic value will be different. Technology itself is one reason that new power dynamic will accompany transactions across these exchanges. User generated content becomes user generated value. This is an exchange that will attract a lot of liquidity from those most familiar with the web, and who want to play in this inherently liberating medium (TCP/IP matters; it sends power to the edge of the network).
Technology’s impact on this comes from the fact that the modern computer is an interactive device. The speed of communication inbound determines the pace of your response, if you are paying the attention (attention in kind and attention in quantity) that full productive use of the device demands. The tool demands, it doesn’t just give; the tool makes the user an extension of the tool, rather than a tool being an extension of our will or force, as previous, non interactive tools were.
The tool demands a certain kind of attention. You don’t give it attention. It snares you subtly into loops of attention, communication and response, like a tar baby who can dance.
I wonder if you can measure the level of attention demand a particular media has? It’s AIK and its AIQ. Of course there are probably consumption metrics to map against the attention matrix; dollar spend, against time, against durable vs. electronic vs. other goods, etc. how do you spend your depending on the kind of attention you pay when connected to an interactive device? Why would you want to give that information to any old vendor, though. Isn’t there a higher value you could place on it if you computed your attention index? Would that be the coin that would cause John Hegel’s original attention economy to trickle into being?
Permalink
12.06.07
Posted in exchanges at 11:29 am by Andrea McGrath
The team behind the Social Stock Exchange Ltd in London is continuing its development efforts, and this week it was reported that they would begin a study - endorsed by the Office of the Third Sector (UK) - to gauge the interest of 300 UK social enterprises in joining a potential social stock exchange. Pradeep Jethi, Chief Executive, and Mark Campanale are focused on creating a market which would include enterprises with annual turnovers of more than £500,000 (approx $1 million USD) that have been trading for three years or longer. There is growing interest and conversation on the idea of a social stock exchange in the UK across the sectors, and increasing interest from government officials - including the Cabinet Minister Phil Hope - who called for investigating a social stock exchange for social enterprises this October “as a means beyond bank borrowing or early stage investment to raise capital by issuing shares.”
Permalink
12.05.07
Posted in exchanges, rating agencies, transparency at 12:54 am by Andrea McGrath
Fast Company magazine has just announced this year’s winners (45) of its annual FAST COMPANY/Monitor Group Social Capitalist Awards. OF NOTE this year is the inclusion of 10 for-profit social capitalists, and the introductory article presents a good opening/overview of the thoughts behind the addition of the for-profit category and emerging developments in this ‘social capital markets’ (recommend a quick read-through all the articles in this edition)
There’s much to discuss from the articles in this edition, but one comment that caught my eye was a quick quote from Andrew Kassoy from B Lab, who notes that “Traditional capital markets have a massive amount of infrastructure built up over the years. Capital, laws, tax codes, research, ratings. This sector needs that sort of infrastructure.”
To that end, the B Lab team has been actively working on developing that infrastructure through its innovative efforts in developing the survey, methodology and tools to identify “B corporations” - companies who demonstrate transparent, comprehensive reporting on social and environmental performance and also restate their articles of incorporation to reflect nonfinancial stakeholders’ interests. The co-founders - Jay Coen Gilbert, Bart Houlahan, and Andrew Kassoy - and some partners are now thinking through how to possibly create a dedicated stock exchange for B companies and lobbying for changes in state laws that would make it easier for hybrid for-profits to incorporate. (if you haven’t yet - check out www.bcorporation.net)
Permalink
· Next entries »
