Presentations

Saturday, February 06, 2010

Are we overvaluing real-time feedback?

Warning: Lost post follows

Back in 1995, “Snow Crash” author Neal Stephenson teamed up with his uncle George Jewsbury under the pseudonym Stephen Bury to produce a potboiler titled “Interface.” The premise: A presidential candidate suffers a stroke and has a chip implanted in his brain. The chip features a wireless connection to feedback from thousands of watch-like devices distributed to a representative sample of Americans. These devices gauge the wearer’s reaction to political speeches, allowing the candidate to make mid-course adjustments and bolster public reaction to his candidacy.

To me, this bit of speculative fiction defines the notion of a real-time feedback loop.

As the Web proceeds along its evolution into a more real-time network, a idea of a real-time feedback loop is becoming a popular topic of discussion. I attended a panel discussion on Thursday night, part of Social Media Week here in San Francisco, that focused on these loops, defining them as “a method for capturing ideas as they arise and bringing them back into the group for examination through the use of social media.” Promotional copy for the event asserted:

When an idea’s expression generates a creatively relevant or insightful response, a well-organized listening/engagement practitioner captures that flash of brilliance, and feeds it back to the originator as an enriched question, thus creating a real-time feedback loop.  In this transformational moment, a thought-leader may have a second opportunity to be heard and have their expression innovatively re-cast. 

With social media we facilitate this process ever more effectively. It is like cold fusion—when used properly, it creates more value than it consumes, lowering the carbon footprint of innovation.

The idea of real-time feedback loops have been rattling around in my brain since Thursday night’s discussion. Then it occurred to me: What better place to organize my thoughts than my blog?

Where do real-time feedback loops begin?

The Internet didn’t invent real-time feedback loops. The thunderous applause of an audience that leads to a multiple curtain calls is a real-time feedback loop; so is tepid applause followed by a rush for the exits. The Grateful Dead’s symbiotic relationship with its audience influenced the band’s live improvisational music. The crowd’s response almost always affects a standup comic’s routine.

The Net, however, has added two dimensions to real-time feedback loops: specificity and reach.

Specificity—The aggregate response of the crowd is pretty simple. They love it, they’re into it, they disagree, they don’t think it’s funny, they hate it. The Net has provided individuals a voice that allow the performer or communicator to analyze why the crowd is reacting the way it is and respond to specific observations or alter behaviors in order to influence opinions. This is nothing new: For at least a decade, probably longer, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) has provided the infrastructure for backchannels, on which conference attendees discuss presentations with one another in real time. In some instances, these backchannels have been projected on a screen where a speaker can see and react to it. Now, Twitter’s hashtag convention—along with some other tools—have made backchannels available to more people than just the geek crowd who knew how to tap into IRC.

Reach—Streaming media and Twitter have expanded the reach of events—from keynotes and panel discussions to product launches and press conferences—to people who can’t be there in person. Again, this is nothing new. The presidential State of the Union address is one example of a speech that is available to larger audiences than just those who can squeeze into the chamber of the House of Representatives. The Net’s streaming capabilities, though, have made it possible to extend this ability to speakers and events that don’t warrant mainstream television network coverage. The most recent LeWeb, for example, was streamed to an audience hungry for presentations they couldn’t see in person due to the event’s cost (expensive) and location (Paris).

Combine these factors and the significance of real-time feedback loops becomes clear. Not only can an executive speaking at a product launch hear specific feedback in real time, but the audience is now expanded to customers or stakeholders from anywhere in the world.

Generally, this feedback comes in two forms: the general chatter of individuals expressing their opinions or talking with one another and targeted questions from individuals to the speaker. Both were in play last Thursday night as people watching a live stream of the presentation (courtesy of Justin.tv) talked among themselves and posed questions for panelists that were relayed by an in-person moderator.

All eyes on real-time

It’s clear that the Net has altered and expanded realt-time feedback loops. Google has incorporated real-time results into its search results. A new category of real-time search engines has emerged sporting names such as Collecta, Topsy and Scoopler.

Prominent people are writing about the real-time web, including the authors of influential outlets like ReadWrite Web, GigaOn, Mashable and TechCrunch. Jeff Pulver, Stowe Boyd and Jeremiah Owyang have written about it. It found its way onto many 2010 prediction lists.

Protocols are being developed to support it. RealTime RSS—from RSS godfather Dave Winer—sends updates when they’re added to a site rather than waiting for an RSS reader or other utility to poll feeds to find what’s new. Google’s PubSubHubbub is similar although not necewssarily a competing standard; the two can work together. Chris Messina described PubSubHubbub’s function this way: “Let’s say (you write) a new blog post; the blogging software then pings any number of hubs with a message: ‘Hey, new content here.’ The hub says, ‘Great thanks,’ grabs the content, and then pushes the content to everyone on its ‘subscriber” list.’

These two protocols expand the opportunity for anyone to get real-time feedback. A marketing executive introducing a new product to a live audience and a virtual one watching the stream can hear back instantly from those engaged over conversational channels (Twitter and IRC, for example) as well as those writing for online news outlets and blogs.

As a result, the focus on real-time feedback has become intense. Some have proclaimed the ability to assess sentiment through real-time search a replacement for costly polling that has been the province of organizations like Harris and Gallup.

But how important is all this real-time feedback?

Is it accurate?

What you think at the instant you hear something may not be what you think after you’ve had time to digest it. Consequently, your immediate feedback may not reflect your long-term view.

This is one of the issues many speakers have with members of the audience live-tweeting their talks or with journalists live-tweeting events.

Much of the tweeting of live events is objective, though, rather than subjective. It’s more like note-taking than analysis. And even the opinions tweeted in real time have value. After all, you’re presenting in real time and people are reacting. Before, you could only see them shifting uncomfortably in their seats, or maybe actively booing or walking out. Now you can assess exactly why they’re reacting the way they are.

But in some respects, the critics have a point. Consider the widely-covered Apple iPad announcement. Information from Steve Jobs’ presentation was made available in real time through a number of channels and a lot (though certainly not all) of the real-time feedback suggested Apple had another sure-fire hit on its hands. But then came the analysis. Tech journalists, bloggers and others began producing the more thoughtful, detailed reviews after they had a chance to internalize the information, consider it, chew on it. FOr many members of the audience, digesting these views, then sharing them and discussing them with each other, led to a shift in their opinions. In the end, their early tweets didn’t reflect their ultimate views.

Is it representative?

During Thursday night’s panel, the point was made repeatedly that only about 10 percent of your audience will offer real-time feedback. And your larger audience—the customers for the product you’re launching, for instance—won’t even watch the event.

Reacting to real-time feedback, then, could mean that you’re taking action on information that isn’t representative of your customer base. In fact, those who pay attention to the live stream or real-time tweets of your message could be as far from a statistically valid sample of your population as you can get.

Is it contextual?

As I sat in the room where the panel was presented on Thursday, I was able to take in everything at once. There was the reaction of other panelists to what one panelist was saying, panel moderator Jennifer Lindsay‘s reaction, the panel’s reaction to Lindsay’s questions and the reaqction of the audience.

Those watching the stream, on the other hand, saw only what the camera allowed, and the camera was almost always focused on whoever was speaking. Those watching the stream got only a sliver of the experience had by those in attendance. IT’s even worse with those who see only the 140 characters broadcast by those who are live-tweeting the event. The reactions of those receiving these messages, then, could be based on incomplete or out-of-context information. It could conflict with the opinions of the people whose opinions you’re really trying to understand.

Because of these realities, the rush to embrace the real-time web can easily lead us to overvalue real-time feedback and make inappropriate decisions based on it.

When real-time feedback matters

Of course, recognizing the limits of real-time feedback doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be paying attention to it, only that you should be cirumspect in terms of what you do with it.

In a crisis, for example, you’d be foolish to ignore commentary emerging in real time. By monitoring public sentiment, you can determine the depth of reaction to the situation and quickly develop a response strategy. Real-time feedback in response to change initiatives is equally important. People resist change for a variety of reasons and listening to feedback can help you shape your efforts to overcome that resistance.

As for other feedback—to speeches, to announcements, to events—organizations will have to develop processes to determine which feedback requires immediate internalization and action and which becomes just additional information to factor into longer-term thinking. After all, how much can you really do with real-time feedback? We have no brain-implantable chips to help us adjust our comments in real time based on listener feedback. We can’t alter the presentation in mid-course when CNN’s cameras are on you. You can’t redesign the product if it’s already on trucks heading to retail stores. In most instances, real-time feedback won’t be more important than other forms of input, including the articles, reviews, blog posts, tweets and other consumer-generated content that will trickle out over days, weeks and months in response to your company’s message. Your best bet will be to add it to the mix in order to figure out your next steps, whether it’s a version 2.0 of your product, an enhancement to a program or a response to a query or criticism.

None of which means that engaging people through social channels is less important than it was before the real-time web became a hot topic. Engaging individuals through social channels isn’t necessarily the same as participating in a real-time feedback loop. Engaging in conversations, responding to questions and participating in communities is all part of an effort to establish strong relationships that will pay off over the long term.

Nor does this suggest that the real-time web isn’t important. The instant delivery of news means organizations have less time to prepare and more information through which to sift.

But when it comes to taking immediate action on the instant feedback to your message, tread with care. You could be solving a problem that doesn’t really exist.

Related post from Tom Foremski, who was on the panel (and is in the photo above): The Real-Time Web Turns ‘Conversational’ Media Into Noise

Thursday, February 05, 2009

Time got away from me

This incident that happened in Vegas won’t stay in Vegas. But it does explain something about Vegas I have long suspected.

I conducted a half-day workshop this morning for the Las Vegas chapter of the Public Relations Society of America. The day kicked off when my host, Andy North of St. Rose Dominican Hospitals and Saint Mary’s Regional Medical Center, picked me up at The Orleans Hotel and Casino as scheduled at 7 a.m. I noted, by glancing at my watch, that he was right on time. I checked my watch again when he introduced me to the 60 or so attendees promptly at 8, when the session was scheduled to begin.

My watch told me it was just after 10 a.m., the midway point, so I called for a break, then reconvened everyone about 10:20. That’s when things went south. It was 11:30 when Andy started pacing nervously toward the back of the room, so I asked him, “Are we supposed to go until 11:30 or noon?”

“Noon,” Andy said, so I just continued with my presentation. I have done enough presentations to know how to pace myself to get my remarks and the PowerPoint to fit into the allotted time, so I figured I just wasn’t doing a very good job as some people got up to leave. Then, with about 20 minutes’ worth of content remaining, Andy came to the front of the room. I was a bit befuddled: My watch said it was 11:40. In fact, according to Andy’s (and everyone else’s) watch, it was 12:20 p.m.

I’m very grateful to everyone who stuck around and let me wrap up, which was most of the audience (all of whom were terrific—lots of great questions and comments). Clearly, my watch battery began to die after the 10 a.m. break, otherwise I would have picked up the pace, dropped a few examples, and finished on time. At least, that was my first thought. But some of those who attended set me straight. “This is Las Vegas,” more than one of them said, and one explained, “The city has made it possible to slow time down for visitors.”

Which explains everything, including how it can seem like I’ve only been feeding twenties into that slot machine for an hour (according to my watch) when in fact it has been two hours or more. Pretty devious, isn’t it?

I’m still replacing my watch battery.

Monday, April 14, 2008

PR Open Mic connects students, faculty, and practitioners

Robert French, the social media-promoting PR professor at Auburn University, has launched a Ning-based social network for PR students and faculty called PR Open Mic. He’s also thrown the door open to practitioners in hopes that a dialogue will emerge that ultimately improves PR curricula and benefits students.

As of this morning, the group boasts 382 members (including me). And, unlike some Ning networks that almost instantly enter stagnation mode, PR Open Mic is off to a vibrant start.

Phil Gomes, the Edelman Digital stalwart, has started a group called “Ask Phil.” And rather than just answer questions, he produces videos. In fact, one of the first questions—Kaye Sweetser, from the University of Georgia—came in the form of a video asking about the real value of research in PR. (I’d bet my iPod that Kaye knows the answer, but figured a reply from a practitioner would make an impression on students.) Phil’s answer included an interview with Edelman US CEO Matt Harrington:

Find more videos like this on PROpenMic

A few of the other groups have emerged around geography—one for European issues, another for students for whom English is not their first language, another for UK members. Robert has posted an item addressing the global diversity of the membership, which shows about one-third of the sign-ups come from Europe. Additionally, there’s a faculty group and one for sharing PR syllabi and resources.

Students ask good questions, as evidenced by the discussion forum, which is host to queries like, “What do PR writers REALLY have to know about AP Style?” and “Maximizing PR when there really is no budget.” The events section is getting loaded up with conference and podcamp info, and nobody seems shy about uploading photos and videos.

As with all Ning networks, anybody who joins PR Open Mic gets a blog, although there hasn’t been much time for many members (other than Robert) to post to them.

I emailed Robert about his goals for PR Open Mic:

I’ve dreamed of a network that will connect public relations faculty and students from around the world.  One of the truly positive aspects of social media is the beneficial impact it may have on education. Connecting all of these people in one site will, I hope, create an environment of sharing and learning in a casual informal way. I actually believe that the site may, on its own, serve as a seminar or colloquium for colleges and universities.  Faculty can pool enough resources and, with the aid of streaming video or audio, create an entire class interviewing practitioners, faculty and students on PR practice around the world.  Beyond that, the site may serve as a connection point for finding internships and employment.  Realizing all of the students I’ve had who have already found jobs (or jobs found them) through their blogs, this aspect of the site offers great promise, too.

A lot of the usual suspects have joined from the PR social space—Elizabeth Albrycht, Jeremy Pepper, Constantin Basturea, Kami Huse, Paull Young, Eric Eggertson…the list goes on. I’m looking forward to interaction between these voices and those in the academic world.

Hat tip to Phil Gomes.

Friday, November 16, 2007

A nifty one-page handout

A couple weeks ago, I wrote that I was reconsidering my position on handouts for my talks and presentations. Among those who read the post was Lisa Junker who works for ASAE and the Center, a joint venture of the American Society of Association Executives and the Center for Association Leadership. She emailed me and attached a PDF file of a template for a one-page handout. She wrote:

In our magazine, Associations Now, we recently published a short article that demonstrates one way to create single-sheet handouts that really pop and provide a lot of information in a small amount of space…the author, Jeffrey Cufaude, has a blog as well: http://jeffreycufaude.blogspot.com/.

Lisa gave me persmission to share the template here. I may give this a try for my next talk.

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Revisiting paper handouts

After today, I may have to rethink my position on handouts.

For years, I have resisted providing handouts of my presentations. The reasons:

• Delivering handouts weeks before the speaking engagement precludes making changes to the presentation, even if events or better examples make such a change a good idea.
• We’re supposed to be going green, right? I have a file cabinet full of presentation handouts from conferences. I’ve never looked at any of them. How many trees would have been spared if those handouts simply had never been printed?
• Somebody (I think it was Wilma Matthews) told me about research that proves people retain less from presentations when they have a handout of the presentation in front of them.
• I hate it when I have a point that’s going to be a big “ah ha” moment, but it’s spoiled by people who can’t resist reading ahead.

My concession has been uploading a PDF of my presentation and making it available for download after the talk is over. Then today came along.

I’m in Vegas (at this moment sitting at McCarran waiting for my flight home). I delivered this morning’s keynote at the annual Healthcare Internet Conference, then did a lunch talk at IABC’s Las Vegas chapter. My cell phone rang while I was speaking and the caller left a message. This is the gist of the message:

Hi. I’m attending a conference at the Venetian Hotel. I found the handout of your presentation and it blew me away. I’m at a different conference but I got permission from your conference to keep this copy I found. I’m with a non-profit and, as I read your presentation, I realized our marketing company is doing things the old way. We’re very highly rated but having trouble getting our story out there. Can you help?

I called him back and we’re going to have a longer call when we’re both in our offices next week.

I never considered handouts as marketing tools for people attending conferences other than the one where I’m presenting. That may be worth a few trees after all.