you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here

with this semester wrapping up, i'm down to my final months as a college student before graduation in may. as many of you can attest with your own experiences...soo hard to believe.

i'm a business major now but originally i was going to do CLEG. in either case, i never figured I'd be taking a class on blogs and social networking technology. i remember being one of the first of my friends from home to set up a facebook. how crazy is it to think i'd be taking a class on it before i graduated?? like that commercial says, life comes at you fast. sometimes in a good way.

as dissatisfied as i am with AU sometimes, it almost makes me proud to have a class like this. it's so current. text books and lectures and traditional powerpoints are so then. THIS is now.

i'm not sure exactly what we talked about in our class this one particular day, but things like blogs and user generated content came up in both of my classes later on in the day. i wouldn't have known much if it wasn't for stuff we did in this class. for once i felt like everything was coming together and i was truly receiving a real education.

as happy as i was for a second, it really made me think, too. education, success, happiness...they are all elusive entities. not something you can grab at once or hold on to very tightly. it takes continuous effort and development to stay on top of it. adapting is critical. recognizing how change can benefit you instead of how it might hurt you. the technology we studied is of course just a small part of it, but an important one at that.

thanks guys for a good semester and best of luck
see ya around

it's not WHAT you say...

why can't we all be as smart as andrew keen?

i have to say i didn't much like the tone of his "digital emperor" article and when i watched additional interviews of him, his arrogant tone and demeanor did nothing to sway my opinion.
basic searches of his name reveal many others who share this same sentiment. and how could they not?

seems like mr. keen is really concerned about "our culture" being destroyed by the content posted by anyone without ivy league degrees who is not part of the priveleged elite. the United States was borne as a country to fight these principles...to give anyone a chance. (ironically, keen is english)

the problem is not that non-traditional outlets of expression exist or that those without traditional background and expertise create content. those with long academic backgrounds and piles of degrees are free to use these mediums as well. they just are not using them as efficiently as others so this "tremendous knowledge" is, in a sense, being wasted. those who complain their messages are not being heard i think are forgetting one of the most important rules of all communication: know your audience. if you want your work to gain some respect outside the ivory tower, make it available, make it understandable. google results are not generated arbitrarily or by chance. they are determined by algorithms that find the most popular results. are people like andrew keen really disturbed by the "loss of integrity" they assoicate with new media, or are they more upset their work is not topping the charts?

blUGCs

derek powazek lambasting the term 'user-generated content' reminds me of my complaints about the term blogs. obviously his is much more clever and he actually suggests an alternative.

however, calling things authentic is too much of an endorsement for my liking. i happen to like the term user-generated content. that's exactly what it is. because of all the linking and tagging, one has to question how much is so 'authentic'. 'user-generated' lets you know someone is behind the work and that it truly is generated--that is, it may not be totally original or authentic, but someone has put their own spin on it and put it out there for the world to see.

honestly i think user-generated is a friendly term for some of this. generated implies that something has been created. what does a blog imply? someone was finally motivated enough to put their moans and groans in writing?

people love to name and re-name and nickname the most obscure things, so, with a movement as large as the now infamous UGC, i'm sure some alternatives will start to pop up. so until then, hang in there derek.

social (cause) networking

after reading the article on teens who raised money through other social networking sites, i was inspired to write about it. i almost couldn't believe it when i logged in and saw this.

if we use the web to do everything else, why not use it for some good?

while we sit and nod our heads, nick anderson and ana slavin did something about it. they did a lot about it.

i can remember the fundraisers and charity causes at high school and maybe sometimes we combined with other local schools. but to coordinate such a large-scale effort as they did is amazing. also, considering it is supporting a cause most high school students probably knew little to nothing about. they were successful because they connected to their audience through accepted mediums, and also mobilized them. or, basically every marketers dream. i doubt either of them will have trouble rounding out their college applications in the next year or two.

with any technology there's benefits and drawbacks. you love to see this, but i can only shake my head in disbelief of the stupidity of those who use the technology for things such as flash mobs.

in any case, i admire those who use the web to amass fortunes, look down upon those who use it for stupidity, and respect those who can simply create solely for the benefit of others.

picking a winner

in the day and age of entrepreneurship and development, new jobs are created all the time. these jobs are not the kind you talked about with guidance counselors back in high school or the kind that show up in generic job-type surveys. so how can you know if you're a potential fit, and if so, how can a company find you?

the answer is social networking and its convergence with recruiting.

it's one thing to solicit resumes from those actively seeking jobs, but often times it is the people who are in another job currently that are most desirable. this is the attraction to these sites. recruiters get a look at a variety of people and those same people are at a no-loss position by merely putting their resume on display...if they hear something fine, if not they'll stay where they are. it's a good situation for both parties.

i like that the article mentions using discretion when looking for prospects and realizing a subtle tie may not be the most viable option. it's important to realize the potential of these types of sites but also to recognize their limitations.

as this sector further develops, recuriters will become more savvy in employing these techniques and job seekers will also refine their methods of use to maximize exposure and attractiveness. these can certainly be a valuable tool for students at a school like AU where there are not a ton of recruiters coming to campus. certain fields also lend themselves to this more than others. for example, extremely technical fields where concrete, black and white skills are the primary requirement are the best fit. a recruiter can see what a person knows (or says they know) and more or less make a decision. something in a more personal field will require more face-to-face analysis.

all in all, these can be a great tool for people looking to make a career move and those looking to employ them. i'd still take a generous, well-positioned alumni base with hiring power over all the expertise in the world on these sites though.

drawing the line

networking is all the rage these days. it seems like it doesn't really matter what you can do on your own, as long as you have a powerful "network," you' re all set. of course this isn't entirely true, but there is some merit behind the thought.

as the networking movement has become so strong, companies are now looking to leverage the networks of their employees to help the organization as a whole. previously the most valuable feature of a network outside your own company was the ability to find another job, but now it is more of an internal business asset. companies are relying on these networks to generate sales leads and suddenly everyone from r&d to accounting is a part of the sales force.

in a small organization where there is a lot of interaction between co-workers, these networks may be easily exposed, but in large companies, co-workers sometime have no idea about their resources. my favorite comparison was the needle in a haystack. the sales lead was obviously the needle and all the other employees were the haystack.

now technology has been developed to find the needle. the biggest obstacle is whether or not employees are willing to submit to this technology. do they want to share their network of resources? the overriding theme is that, sooner or later, they won't really have much of a choice and corporations will milk them for every ounce of their worth beyond their actual job functions.

as a leader, i think it is necessary to be able to use the resources of your employees. it can obviously make the difference between negotiating a successful deal or coming up just short. as the subordinate, however, i would be more reluctant to share in some cases. these are connections that you made and if you are cut out as the kind of middle man in the whole process, your value to the business has decreased greatly.

i guess the key is to continue making connections and show that your network is large enough that you will always be an asset to the business.

it all comes down to...

everybody is on a team these days. everything is accomplished with collaboration. those sound like great ideas. and they really can be.
anyways, now the debate shifts not on whether or not to work on teams, but how to work on teams.

business has demanded collaborative online technology. it can make existing processes more efficient and highlight new collaborations that were cost prohibitive before. how can we make these virtual teams a winner? the answer is by making them as technologically advanced as possible, but at the same time, trying to keep as many elements of a real life team meeting as possible.

to win over those reluctant to go virtual, they need to be convinced there are many positives and few drawbacks. that is--virtual teams are cheaper and can lead to better ideas by exploiting new relationships. these are a new type of relationships though. they are all business. it is an environment where only the most productive will thrive and only the most efficient methods of communication are embraced.

and to those concerned about less face-to-face time, you can meet some co-workers outside of work at a nice restaurant because you will have saved time and increased the bottom line. oh, you say you won't because you didn't actually like those people in the first place? exactly.
change can be tough, but it must be embraced. those who are the most successful are simply the most adaptable.