Can Twitter be used for community discussion? Nestivity believes it can.

For many, Twitter is a great way to find out what’s happening in the world but not the first place they would turn to drive a meaningful discussion with a group of colleagues or customers. Nestivity hopes to change this by creating a tool which allows Twitter users (and that includes companies) to drive meaningful discussions through Twitter.

The site officially launched today, and it’s free for Twitter users to sign up. The company offers a freemium pay model by charging customers for adding multiple community moderators — provided you only have one moderator, it remains free (for now).

Naturally I’m trying it out and you can help figure out how it works by joining in on the conversation I’ve just set up in my very own “nest”:

What’s the role of IT in creating great customer experiences? Check out the discussion and add your POV and help drive the discussion and you could see your POV included in the new research to be published at the upcoming CIO Forum in May.

And “Chief Digital Officer: real or imagined?” — add your POV to this discussion to contribute toward the research I’m doing on this to be published at our CMO/CIO Forum in the fall.

Can Twitter support vibrant discussions? Does Nestivity add to the ability to make Twitter a useful engagement environment? Share your thoughts on this post here.

Comments

Opportunity to share Nestivity

Nigel - thank you for the opportunity to share Nestivity with Forrester.

Feedback on CDO convo

Hi Nigel, tried Nestivity but it broke, so I'll share here. To answer your CDO question, I go back to the core need: orgs—commercial, government, nonprofit—are getting more out of alignment with their stakeholders every quarter they aren't profoundly digital. Stakeholders are currently changing each other's expectations about what interacting "online" should be. My firm advises on using social tech to develop relationships faster and cheaper by 10x. After strategy, though, the real fun begins: mentoring people how to interact efficiently yet frankly, so their interactions increase trust. It is a complex business, and the learning curve is significant. Promo-oriented social media is very superficial and won't deliver until it gets real and personal. Orgs also need to understand mobile is a completely new way: as opportunities to empower users to accomplish their desired outcomes—not to sell or promote. Use data in service to this and offer apps. Big data is a different animal: more investment; big thought gap as "scientists" and CIOs prefer "structured" data which is still useful, but the most personal data, closest to stakeholders, is often unstructured, and orgs are biased against this; I predict adoption will be long in coming for most. Ecommerce needs to get over selling, too—and into empowering and helping. Client work consistently reveals that ecommerce sites that integrate the stakeholder voices are more relevant—and probably sell more, too.

All this said, do orgs need CDOs? In some cases, sitting execs are too non-digital and the business is rapidly sinking—i.e. publishing/media, where many CDOs live now—so CDOs can add value to the org. Something else, though, will lead to CDOs: "digital transformation" is a huge task, and it will require a specialized role for a few years IMO. Orgs that want to define markets will use digital to realign themselves with stakeholders. The only thing that would prevent more digital adoption is no power, so we'd have to go analog, which will not happen. More thoughts on this here if you like: http://tinyurl.com/cdotransf