by Josh Bernoff

Thanks mostly to the BBC, which highlighted a quote from this blog yesterday (see left), 8000 people stopped by the Groundswell yesterday to read and talk about users.

I learned quite a bit from their responses, which I'll share.

I very much liked this quote from David Ogilvy's Ogilvy on Advertising, sent in by James Cherkoff:

"The consumer is not a moron, she is your wife."

Both my colleague Harley Manning, who leads Forrester's customer experience group, and a reader from the UK, Ken Tindall, pointed out that user interface expert Alan Cooper discusses this issue at length in his book The Inmates Are Running The Asylum. Cooper, and Forrester, recommend designing products with a specific person in mind -- a sort of archetype for the people you will be serving. This archetype is called a persona. Personas are one of the central elements of scenario design, designing Web sites (or anything) so a specific type of person can achieve their goals. When you're designing for "Fred" or "Amanda" instead of for a "user" it's easier to sympathize.

Finally, reading all these comments, many from developers, led me to create (forgive the ego) Bernoff's first law of usability:

The closer you work to technology, the more tempting it is to think of your clients and customers as "users" and not people.

I was led to this by the impassioned pleas to keep the word "user" from technical support people, Web developers, software developers, and writers of technical manuals, many of whom cling to it like a cherished stuffed animal. As my colleague Brian Haven wrote in his new blog:

Designers, technologists, and business practitioners should consider abandoning these terms to force themselves to focus on the needs and actions people take, which should inevitably lead to better products and services.

I am trying not to make offensive generalizations here, since many of you technology workers have reached an enlightened rapport with the people who use your products. But could this episode about users and "lusers" have happened anywhere but at MIT, where everyone is immersed in technology all the time?

This is not just political correctness. Next time your computer, a Web site you're visiting, or a technology product starts behaving in a way that mystifies and frustrates you, ask yourself, is this my fault? Or did this happen because the designer thought of me as a "user" and not a person?

Tags: the word user, user, bernoff, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

by Josh Bernoff

Thanks to posts by Steve Rubel (along with a tweet) and the BBC, my musings about the word "user" have generated a huge surge in traffic and opinions here at the Groundswell.

The blogosphere's response has been overwhelming positive -- look here and here, for example. This is thoughtful. My favorite post title is "User is a four letter word." I think this idea is making people think, which was my intention.

To all the people who had this idea before me -- I'm on your side.

To those who said dishwashers have users -- sure they do. But they typically have owners' guides, not user's guides. Owners are powerful. Users, somehow, don't seem to be.

The masses coming to the blog have left me some pretty indignant comments. Developers, in particular, seem to think this word is a perfectly fine part of their world. I'm grateful that you think about users in your design. I'd be even more grateful if you think of them as people. I think the closer you are to technology, the more you need to use this word. I'm not out to stop you. But please allow me to think differently.

I came to this point because I think the book is/will be better with fewer "users" in it. When it's done you can judge for yourself.

Tags: the word user, user, bernoff, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

by Josh Bernoff

The more I write and read about social media, the more frustrated I get with the term "users."

When I started in the business twenty-mumble years ago, writing software manuals, people who used software were unusual (and had to be masochists). We spent a lot of time talking about users. The word user was helpful -- it helped us to keep in mind that there was a poor slob on the other end of what we were building.

Those times are long gone. We know users are important now. Disappoint them and you lose. So why do we still have to call them "users," which puts the emphasis on the technology they are using?

Yes, I know "users are people, too." But you know what? All people are users now! (With nearly 80% Net penetration in the US this is pretty close to true.) Users put up with computers. People just do stuff.

Nobody talks about users of dishwashers, or users of retail stores, or users of telephones. So why are we talking about "users" of computers, browsers, and software?

Try, just for a day, to stop using this word. You'll be amazed at how differently you think about the world.

Web users become people looking for information.

Application users become employees trying to get stuff done.

Users of your Web site become customers. (Forrester's group focused on usability of Web sites and other technologies is called the Customer Experience team. I like that.)

User-generated media becomes amateur media.

And most importantly, social media users become people connecting with other people. Once you think about it that way it becomes a lot easier to understand. And it focuses you on the relationships, which will always be around, not the technologies, which are always changing.

It's amazing (to me) the clarity this brings to writing, and to thinking. Words matter.

Jimmy Guterman took the pledge to stop talking about users at O'Reilly. Way to go, Jimmy.

So now you take the pledge. Right here in the comments section of this blog. Or on your own blog and link to this.

I promise to avoid the word user whenever possible.

I will think of people who use technology as people, customers, and friends. I won't use them, and they won't use me.

Postscript: more posts that I agree with on this topic:

Thomas Van Der Wal

Don Norman

Robert Scoble

[I did a followup post based on all the reactions to this one.]

Tags: the word user, user, bernoff, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

by Josh Bernoff

Today Sony Electronics entered the blogosphere.

Sony's blog is written by Rick Clancy, head of corporate communications for Sony Electronics. I know Rick pretty well, having worked with him when I was a TV analyst and he is the ideal choice to blog for Sony.

First of all, he's a straight shooter -- not something you take for granted with PR people. Look at the first post: Sony No Baloney.

Second, he has something to say. Rick has been at Sony a long time. He understand the company and all its parts. This should make for interesting posts.

Third, he has authority. Everything important Sony Electronics says goes through him. If Rick wasn't Sony's top blogger, whoever was would have to go through him anyway.

That said, it's going to be interesting. Sony is a huge, global company in transition. There are big successes, including Sony's line of Bravia TVs and its backing of Blu-Ray, which I (and Forrester) think is going to beat HD-DVD in the movie race eventually. There are also challenges, including what I believe will be a slowing of demand for big expensive TV sets.

While the blog doesn't officially address the larger corporate parent (the blog is for electronics, the parent Sony company includes Sony Pictures and Sony Playstation) it will inevitably attract commentary on the Sony parent company. With the charismatic Sir Howard Stringer, the first westerner to head Sony, continuing to transform the electronics giant, the blog will become a lightning rod for Sony-bashers and Sony-lovers alike.

Sony's blog is using moderated comments. The sister Playstation blog had over 500 comments on a recent posting. I can't wait to see how Sony Electronics' buttoned-down style interacts with the wild west of the blogosphere in a Japanese-founded, multinational company run by a Welshman. This should be fun.

Rick already knows what it's like to deal directly with analysts and reporters. Now he'll get to deal with regular people in a more personal way. The first post is a good sign -- it's personal, not too corporate. Now we'll see if he can keep it up.

Tags: Sony, bernoff, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

by Josh Bernoff

We've received a lot of response on the awards post from last week. Based on that I thought I would clarify a few things. Here it is in Q&A format:

Q. Didn't you set an awfully short deadline?

A. Yeah, good point. To be more fair in letting people get entries ready in time, we're extending the deadline to September 1. Send your entries to groundswell@forrester.com.

Q. What's the most important criterion in judging the entries?

A. Accomplishing a measurable business goal, with proof that the application worked to reach that goal.

Q. Is this open to companies outside the US? How about B2B companies?

A. This competition is open to anyone anywhere in the world who accomplishing business goals with social technologies. (Sorry, but we have to insist that the descriptions you provide to us are in English, even if the original site was in Korean or Portuguese.) We're interested in applications from consumer companies and B2B companies. Non-profits, too. And this includes companies accomplishing internal goals with employees -- those would get considered in the MANAGING category.

Q. What are those categories and what do they mean?

A. Since you might not have seen our original post on goals of social technologies, we'll repeat it here.

1. LISTENING. Finding out what your customers are really saying. Best tools are brand monitoring, private communities like Communispace, ratings/reviews.

2. SPEAKING. Connecting with your customers in new ways, extending PR and marketing. Best tools are blogs, podcasts, participation in MySpace/YouTube and other user-generated media.

3. ENERGIZING. Getting your best customers to evangelize your products. Best tools are public communities and ratings/reviews.

4. SUPPORTING. Helping customers solve their own and each other's problems. Best tools are blogs, forums, wikis.

5. EMBRACING. Working with your customers to make products better. Best tools are communities, user-generated media.

We also added a sixth goal:

6. MANAGING. Using social technologies with your organization to make employees and managers more effective

Q. Another award? You've got to be kidding.

A. The world is full of awards for prettiest blog or most popular YouTube video. We want to recognize business value. We haven't heard of anybody doing that. The people doing that deserve to get recognized at our Forum events in Chicago in October and Barcelona in November.

Tags: Groundswell awards, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

Are you doing something special with social technologies? We want to reward you.

With this post, we open up the world for nominations for the Groundswell awards -- to be given to the most innovative and effective uses of Groundswell technologies like blogs, wikis, social networks, and communities by organizations. Rules are posted below. Nominations are due by August 1September 1, so gets yours in soon! Winners get a free ticket to Forrester's Consumer Forum, a fantastic event in Chicago October 11 and 12, where they will be recognized for excellence. This is your chance to strut your stuff!

The rules:

1. Entries should represent excellent and effective use of social technologies to advance an organizational or corporate goal.

2. All entries must be emailed to groundswell@forrester.com. Entries should include text, links, and any other attachments in electronic format only. Powerpoint, MS Word, and PDF files are acceptable. Entries must also include telephone and email contact information for the individual submitting the entry. Entries are considered non-confidential public information and may be quoted, with attribution, on this site, in Forrester Research documents, and in the book Groundswell. If you're shy, don't enter.

3. Entries can be submitted in one of six categories: LISTENING, SPEAKING, ENERGIZING, SUPPORTING, EMBRACING, and MANAGING -- based on the objectives of the organization in pursuing social technologies. (Update: a seventh category - SOCIAL IMPACT has been added) This is partly a reflection of our belief that categories like "best blog" and "best community" are ephemeral, but goals and relationships are more fundamental. You can submit the same entry in more than one category, but it won't help you. For more information what the first five goals mean, see this. The Managing goal applies to use of technology within an organization.

4. Entries should include a description of what the company or organization did, what the goal was, and how you or they measured the goal to prove it worked. For applications available to all on the Internet, include a link to the site or application. For applications behind a password or firewall, include screen shots or other materials showing the site or application. All entries should include a contact person available for interview for more detail on the applications. If you cannot provide a knowledgeable person to talk about it, you probably won't win.

5. Entries can be submitted by the organization or company that did them, or by a vendor or agency that worked with them. For entries submitted by a vendor or agency, you must have the permission of the organization or company that you worked with.

6. The judges are Josh Bernoff and Charlene Li. Our judging decisions are final and completely subjective.

7. We will judge entries on the following criteria: (a) Innovation, (b) Audacity, (c) Authenticity, (d) Delivery of measurable results. Use of fancy technology is not necessary and will not be a criterion. Applications that have already received a lot of publicity are less like to win vs. newer ideas.

8. We will award at most one winner in each of the six seven categories, plus runners-up if we feel like it. If there are no worthy entries in a category, we won't give an award in that category.

9. Winners get a free ticket to Forrester's Consumer Forum in Chicago, Illinois, USA on October 11-12, 2007, a $1995 value.  Speakers at the Forum include  Christina Norman, President of MTV;  Christie Hefner, CEO of Playboy  Enterprises; Richard Edelman, CEO of Edelman; and Henry Jenkins, Co-director of MIT's Comparative Media Studies Program.

10. Winners will also be featured on this blog and will receive their awards at the Forum in Chicago. They will also receive a handsome electronic badge they can post on the Internet site (possible slogan: Groundswell Award Winner: WE'RE SWELL!). Winners must also agree to be featured in the book Groundswell, but at our discretion. If your application is not yet announced, it may reassure you to know that the book won't be published until next spring.

Note: based on questions we added a new Q&A post about the awards.

Update: A new category - Social Impact has been added. More details are available in this post.

Tags: Groundswell awards, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us

by Josh Bernoff

We recently got the chance to interview George Wright, Director of Marketing for Blendtec, the company responsible for the video you see here. The reason I'm telling you about it is that Blendtec is that unusual phenomenon: a company that has managed to make YouTube into an effective marketing tool.

Blendtec makes commercial blenders that you might see in a Chili's or other chain restaurant. The Blendtec blenders use a computer-controlled direct hookup between the motor and the blade. Although the product costs $400, the company wanted to find out: was there a consumer market for such a powerful but high-end blender?

While pondering how teeny little Blendtec could get the word out, Wright popped by the development lab, where there was sawdust on the floor. Mystified, he asked and was told that the developers were grinding up 2x2 lumber as a test. The demonstration was dramatic -- so dramatic that he decided to use his in-house video resources (mostly used for training before this) and put it up on YouTube. I'd tell you the rest of the story, but while we were preparing this post the rascal managed to get himself in the Wall St. Journal.

To see the results, see the blendtec channel on YouTube, or just go to www.willitblend.com. Once the first video, of a Coca-Cola and a chicken, caught on through getting featured on digg, it was clear that YouTube marketing was working for Blendtec. They went through marbles, cubic zirconia, and tiki torches, but the most popular so far has been the iPod obliteration with almost 4 million views.

Forget the views. The question is not "Will It Blend?" but "Does It Sell?" And the answer is: Yes. According to Wright, consumer sales have increased five-fold since the videos went up on YouTube and Revver.

Despite your prurient interest in seeing home electronics and random food items turned into a puree, I know you read this blog to learn about the uses of social technologies in business. So you may be wondering, can I try this at home? No, I don't mean blending, I mean marketing with YouTube. Of course you can. But first here are a few reasons why BlendTec succeeded -- reasons you ought to pay attention to before trying it yourself:

1. It's funny. It's visually arresting. It's short. These are three qualities your videos must possess. Here's another company that also succeeded with a visually arresting video: Ray-Ban.
2. It's authentic. These guys are geeks. Wright told me the CEO -- Tom Dickson, who's featured in the video -- is an engineer. It comes across. This stuff ain't slick, folks, and if it were it wouldn't work. (I love the proud and cheesy smile while he watches his company's blender reduce some object to dust.)
3. It's original. Figure out what your unique value is. Then film it and put it up there. Don't copy Blendtec, or Ray-Ban, or Dove. This may be the hardest part.
4. It actually connects to the value of the product. You see these videos and you can't help saying "Can that blender really do that? Maybe I should get one." And many people do. You could be a hit on YouTube with a video that doesn't connect to the value of your product, but that will help your ego a lot more than your sales.

Blendtec is now generating revenue from views on Revver. It's making custom videos for corporations (they did one for Novell). But this stuff doesn't matter, any more than the news that the Geico cavemen may get their own TV series. These are all consequences of a successful campaign. The campaign is the key, not the consequences.

All the articles about Blendtec focus on the $50 that it cost to do that first video. But the hard part -- the priceless part -- is thinking it up. That takes brains. And one heckuva blender.

Tags: YouTube, Blendtec, Revver, www.willitblend.com, bernoff, Forrester Research, Groundswell

Add to del.icio.us