Going online there are so many different things you can do and build, which add value to whatever audience it is, you’re looking to serve. But even so there are still some ground rules for getting to that success, which would be valuable - and cost saving - for you to observe.

ReadWriteWeb recently compiled a list of things you need to consider in order to build an insanely great web service. My argument would be that the list really fits on a lot of other stuff as well, so do yourself a favour and check it out. And make sure you comply with the advice given - because they are so true.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on July 1, 2009 at 15:35, filed under How? and tagged advice, building, designing, innovation, value. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

I mean, are you really cool enough to win? Both as a person and as part of whatever business or organization, you’r a part off?

I ask because it seems like everybody think that we can all optimize our presence online. We can all stand out and be noted in search engines, social networking sites and on the various services that clutter the web.

But we tend to forget that what the web gives, the web can take away. If we’re not cool enough, we will get buried. We will disappear under myriads of data, and it’s unlikely we will ever be found unless by a chance encounter. Yes, the competition for attention out there is so heavy.

So what do you need to be cool enough to win?

Well, you need to be cool as a person. Someone who stands out. Someone who holds his head high and have something to contribute being it original ideas, passion for getting involved or just a big heart - anything out of the ordinary really.

Or your company or product need to be cool as in ‘great’. These times are not for empty promises. Those who deliver on their promises win. The web will help take care of that. The rest will be forgotten. And it will all be good.

So get your act together. Now.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 22, 2009 at 18:24, filed under How? and tagged brand, cool, disappear, image, losing, product, search, social networking, standing out, winning. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

If you were to design an entire business today, would you do so differently than you would have only a few years ago?

Yes, is the claim by Jevon MacDonald et al, who have - for the very same reason - started a business, where they focus on social business design. The basic principle, as I understand it, is to think social tools, collaboration and everything online allows us to do into how processes and flows for business are thought out and executed on. An interesting idea.

There is especially one piece of the thinking I like: The idea about turning database entries into events. How unimportant it may seem, I actually think it could have a deep impact on creating a more social kind of business. Because while we tend to forget about data sitting in databases, once we have gotten them in there, the very concept of an event suggests something that we share, work on together and keep coming back to.

I’ll be interested in seeing how the work progresses. I’m not sure I’m to keen on the measurement regime being suggested, as I think being social and being measured are two worlds apart. But I might be mistaken there.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on at 18:01, filed under What if? and tagged business, collaborating, design, execution, idea, kpi, measuring, openness, processes, sharing, social, transparency. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

Th discussion on privacy online is ongoing. Do we want a more personalized experience, or do we put an end to providing companies with bits and pieces of data about our online habits? Do Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde win the race?

To me it’s about making data personal. If I get data and recommendations - ads, even - presented in a way where it’s being personalized to me and it doesn’t speak corporate mumbo-jumbo, I’ll think it’s ok. If I can get that feeling that what I really have is a personal digital assistant looking out for things that might be beneficial for me or that I might even need, I’ll be happy.

Thus I’ll be firmly on the Dr. Jekyll side. But it will also take a change of attitude on behalf of the companies, we entrust with the data. They need to give up on being greedy and exploit the data, because greed is shortsighted and will ultimately destroy value. But I have serious doubts whether they will ever see it that way.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on at 08:35, filed under How? and tagged data, evil, greed, personal assistant, privacy, recommendations, shortsighted. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

Quite often you don’t have to be a revolutionary yourself to contribute to positive change in the world. You can just make your surplus available for people, who are looking to make the best of same surplus. And using the web there is a lot of surplus you can make available just by a few clicks of a button.

One such example is Docking@Home, which is an iniative that uses your surplus computing power towards getting closer to a cure for HIV. While you’re not using your computer, the scientists can use your spare processing power for analyzing molecules and hopefully finding ones that can bring a cure closer. Now, is that making a difference? And you don’t really have to do anything about it.

What are you waiting for?

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 18, 2009 at 15:45, filed under How? and tagged change, computing power, contributing, cure, docking@home, positive, revolutionary, sharing, surplus. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

Some people and companies seem to think that being social online is about who can yell the highest and get the message out. Well, it’s not. According to Spike Jones of Social Media Today it’s actually more a matter of being ‘involved’ in things.

If you compare social media to a networking event or a party, you’ll see what I mean: Who are the most social? The ones who go about saying high and chit-chat without any real content or outcome one way or the other, or the ones who are engaged in real conversation based on a chance encounter? My money is on the latter.

Therefore social is about being present, listening, engaging - and caring. Those are the fundamentals. And no smart online services or tools can really change that.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 17, 2009 at 18:53, filed under How? and tagged caring, conversation, dialogue, involved, message, shouting, social, social media, social media today, Spike Jones. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

When we have the tools available online to organize ourselves, do we really need government to organize everything for us? Or have we become so accustomed towards getting serviced that we really can’t bother to service ourselves?

The thoughts struck me as I read about WeCommune, a new service which plans to use the web to facilitate sharing of resources in already existing communities based on prior real-life projects. In other terms this means spending wiser in a group instead of spending more as individuals, and I don’t think you need to be Einstein in order to grasp the fundamental sanity of the thought.

But would we sit down and get organized ourselves? I think we could be brought about to doing so. But we need to see the value for ourselves in it. And here I still think that the buck talks the loudest. If we can save from being in a digital-managed self-driven commune in order to spend elsewhere, this might just take off.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on at 16:41, filed under What if? and tagged common, communes, consuming, government, green living, organizing, responsibility, saving, sharing, spending, wecommune.com. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

The economic crisis make people think about how they live their lives and spend their money. It forces scrutiny on people who have been used to careless spending. And the web provides a lot of channels for discussing how to go about it and share tips and ideas on a different lifestyle.

In short people are asking questions - and sharing both them and the answers - like never before. Thinking that that can be countered with more traditional advertising is at the very best naive.

What really needs to happen is for open and honest dialogue and engagement with customers - ordinary people like you and I - to become common place and not something we discuss as being ‘hip’ or the latest fad. If you don’t, the life of your business is at risk, as you’ll get hit by the anti-consumption tidalwave.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 16, 2009 at 00:01, filed under How? and tagged advertising, anti-consumption, consumers, dialogue, passive, people, proactive, sharing. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

Sometimes people ask: It’s great with all these new online tools, but what can I really use them for in my business?

Well, look no further than to Stephen Jagger, who manages his businesses and employees using Web 2.0 tools only. It’s great to see that for every single aspect of the business, there is an online tool to the rescue. While I won’t get into whether the tools, he has chosen are necessarily the right ones for everyone, its still daunting.

Of course the issue here remains that tools come and go, and you run the risk of one of your tools suddenly vanishing from the earth. But I’m confident that as these tools grow better, so will the monetization plans that will help these tools stay in business for the greater good of all businesses.

(via Socialmedia.biz)

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 15, 2009 at 09:00, filed under How? and tagged business management, cloud computing, lean, mean, socialmedia.biz, Stephen Jagger, tools, web 2.0. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.

The other day the craze of the web was to get ones hand on ones vanity URL on Facebook. But eventhough I scrambled to get mine, I’m wondering why we’re so busy being vain online?

Online should be about collaboration for the greater good. About if not eliminating egos then at the very least make them less important in the overall equation.

So why is it that Facebook didn’t decide to just have vanity URL’s for important causes like global warming, renewable energy, human rights etc.? Causes where vanity URL’s would have made them easier to find and sign up for to deliver a personal contribution towards getting these things solved.

That would have been so much in the spirit of the open and social web. But no, we’re still - at the end of the day - vain creatures.

This entry was written by Mads Kristensen, posted on June 14, 2009 at 12:40, filed under What if? and tagged causes, collaboration, facebook, openness, urls, vanity. Leave a comment or view the discussion at the permalink.