The Cluetrain Manifesto is Still News

"The cluetrain stopped there four times a day for ten years and no one ever took delivery." [Doc Searls about an acquaintance at a company that was free-falling out of the Fortune 500, The Cluetrain Manifesto, Apr. 1999]

Is this you? Is this your company?

Despite all this talk of Kindle I just bought the book's souvenir -- the paper, glue, and glossy cover version of this manifesto, which was typed what seems like ages ago. Yet, as Tom Peters has been known to say: it ain't old until it's done.

And while all of the market forces and the theses covered by Rick Levin, Doc Searls, David Weinberger and Christopher Locke have certainly unfolded and spread, while it is true that the attraction of the Internet is human fascination with storytelling, we are only now beginning to see the realization of their vision.

That's because it's our vision, too. I started this week with Web 3.0, it seemed only fair to conclude our brief journey spanning decades where it all begun, with conversation. Markets are conversations, they declared, this is the end of business as usual. As your kids would say from the back seat with anticipation: are we there yet?

As individuals I think we are. The subject matter of today's post at The Blog Herald is that you are your own brand navigator. That has ripple effects throughout the economy. Many of you have left large companies or agencies to start your own business and consultancy. With the tools available today and based on the fact that hyperlinks (by nature relational) subvert hierarchies, with a focused approach you can not only get smarter, you can make a good living from it, hard work included.

The big agencies are starting to feel the pain. I was reading earlier how in today's splintered advertising world Kevin Roberts is Scrambling to keep Saatchi & Saatchi relevant. [hat tip to John Moore] That's because markets are (inter)networked and people are (intra)networked, a reality and not a play on words. I would take the meaning one step further from the original intent to take into account commerce layered upon the original mix. Free agents, consultants, entrepreneurs all get brand ownership has everything to do with commerce -- a promise made is a promise kept, their reputation is on the line.

Individuals talk plain language, with human voices. We have discovered our personal brands, developed our careers, blossomed in our communities of practice and co-work locations. "Networked markets are beginning to self-organize faster than the companies that have traditionally served them. Thanks to the web, markets are becoming better informed, smarter, and more demanding of qualities missing from most business organizations."

Are companies catching up? A few are beginning to talk directly to their markets, to individuals. Many are still deeply afraid of their markets, of hearing the truth. Markets want to talk to companies. I hope more companies decide they want to have this conversation by starting to listen. Because "we are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not waiting."

Comments

[Tom O'Brien]

Valeria:

Nice post. I read The Cluetrain Manifesto just before we started MotiveQuest. Came away convinced of the central hypothesis - that marketing has been changed forever by our ability to find each other. I no longer rely on brand owners for information - I rely on my peers.

My blog - A Human Voice - is a riff on this concept. An it points to one of the most baffling things about "WOM Marketing" that is that corporations and brands cannot have conversations. Only people can have conversations,

Long live the cluetrain!

Tom O'B
http://humanvoice.wordpress.com

[Richard Becker]

Nice post Valeria,

It seems to me much of the fear is tied to moving from a vertical communication approach to a more horizontal one.

It also seems almost ironic that the United States, for fear of brand mismanagement, risks falling behind other countries online. I was listening to a panel discussion on my way to a meeting today where Thomas Friedman reminded one of the most pointed comments in his book was made by Bill Gates, who surmised that it used to be it was better to be a B student in Berkley than a genius in Beijing. That world is behind us.

Unfortunately, until we, as communicators, can demonstrate the value of new media in terms that make sense to more vertical minded businesses, we risk much more than we ever imagined.

Keep it up. All my best,
Rich

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Tom -- first off, I LOVE the name of your blog. Welcome to the conversation. You are welcome here any time. I've been accused of making things too human more than once ;-) I enjoy putting people together, that's what moved me to go into marketing. You'll laugh, someone today suggested we "use" social media to get our message in the marketplace. Hello? Isn't that was has been lacking in conversations all along? Thank you so much for topping by. You had me with your photography.

@Rich -- the voice of reason. I read somewhere today that China is among the number one countries to adopt online media to communicate. The only way that I can think of to demonstrate how it works and why it is important is by doing it an being transparent about it. My boss, colleagues and providers have the URL of this blog. I encourage them to visit often and, if so inclined, to join the conversation. We should not be afraid to talk to each other -- disagreement or different view points can still happen with the utmost respect and civility. What is to be feared is lack of communication, not too much. Good reading you, as always.

[Anne Libby]

Hey, Valeria, you're on target.

I recently decided to approach a company by commenting at their very appealing blog.

Almost a week later, my comment has either been rejected or not yet moderated. (And it was on point, not wacky or self-serving.) I then noticed that none of the posts at their blog showed comments.

Are they inadequately staffed to moderate comments? Or are they afraid?

Are companies catching up? As firms start to create these conversations they need to realize that, to the market, the two very different realities are functional equivalents. (And that blogging effectively is far from a casual effort.)

Be well!

[Karen Hegmann]

Valeria

I think what companies have to realize is that, like it or not, they ARE the topic of conversation. You can have the best laid out marketing plans and expert opinions, but the conversations happening out there on the web can be powerful enough to shut you down.

It's the behind the scenes activities that companies should be paying more attention to, as they can have a significant impact on the brand.

The old way of seeing business as a battlefield is dead. People are looking for new ways to connect, and we have found our vehicle.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Anne -- the problem is that firms are counseled to "use" social media by agencies that are clueless as to how it really needs to work. So they start a blog to launch a new product or a line of products and nobody is accountable internally to facilitate the conversation. Because they think it's just another tool they have to push and control the message. Social media is not a program, it's a dynamic -- very different!

@Karen -- if the messages we are working on inside organizations were relevant, human, useful; if the people were genuine, personable, open, we would not have the need to exclude the people we are trying to reach and influence from those conversations. If social media taught me anything at all (on top of being Italian and incapable of not saying what I think) is that the most important piece is attitude, how you show up. Which was true of social dynamics and communities before we moved it online.

[Karen Hegmann]

Valeria

What you're saying is true. Too often, business adopts an "us vs. them" attitude towards their customers. This one sided approach stresses dominance versus value, and once people feel excluded (ie. they don't feel that they are part of the brand relationship) they will think twice about buying your product or service.

Social media stresses the "how", but it also gives companies answers as to the "why."

[Anne Libby]

Karen, Valeria -- and customers aren't the only participants in the conversation.

By trying to control (or by not being able to manage) your message, you risk cutting off relationships with potential or current employees. (And sadly, for some, this is actually OK...but that starts to veer off into a different topic.)

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Karen -- I should list your blog under marketing ;-) Many organizations are still managing under industrial age constructs -- HR departments as police included. When you exclude people -- inside and outside -- people disengage. There is so much other stuff going on in their lives and with other brands and companies, you may discover they really don't need you as much as you need them.

@Anne -- LOL. As I wrote in response to Karen that is the path of least resistance -- cutting off relationships is easier than maintaining them. It will be interesting to see what the new generation managers does.

[bill]

Haven't read TCM. (Its okay; I haven't read Pride and Prejudice, either.)But when I saw your comment about talking directly to individuals, I thought 'like Big Pharma pitching directly to the consumer?' Because that's generally thought NOT to be a good thing...

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Bill -- Nope, that's not what The Cluetrain Manifesto is about. The authors talk about conversation, not advertising or marketing to -- talking with people. If you'd like to read it, the book is available online for free in its entirety, just follow the link I provided at the end of the post (catching up).

Thank you for stopping by!