Skip to main content

Day: October 11, 2006

JPG Magazine: Brave New Photography

[via the excellent Publishing 2.0]

My, how I like this business!

So – it’s a photography site where “pro-am” photographers can upload images on the current theme. So, it’s “social” and “web2.0” since other website users get to vote on the images they like best. And it’s multichannel because the “winning” photos are printed into a tasty-looking art-mag which is then for sale. The photographers also get paid if their images are printed: not masses, but hey – we’re ‘pro-ams’ and our mums will finally see us ‘in print’.

The site saith:

JPG Magazine is for people who love imagemaking without attitude. It’s about the kind of photography you get when you love the moment more than the camera. It’s for photographers who, like us, have found themselves online, sharing their work, and would like to see that work in print.

JPG is a magazine. It’s published 6 times a year by 8020 Publishing. Check out the back issues. The photos in the magazine come from you!

JPG is a website. Here any photographer can join and upload photos to their member page. You can also submit your photos to issues and themes for consideration in the magazine.

JPG is a community. JPG exists because of, and exclusively for, photographers like you. Without you, we’re nothing.

.

Nice.

I’m going to file this under “ideas I wish I’d had and acted upon”.

Internetnews: “Web 2.0: The ‘Consumerization’ of The Enterprise”

Web 2.0: The ‘Consumerization’ of The Enterprise

Nice, succinct article, citing Gartner’s analysis, of how Web2.0 technologies will permeate the enterprise.

The real point however, behind the obvious “new widgets trickle-down to enterprise” comments, is that these technologies and capabilities will challenge the established working practices and silo-mentality that pervades large companies.

Web2.0 enables and thrives upon collaboration. Traditional organisations are based upon departments, reporting lines and hierarchical processes. The latter will no doubt seek to appropriate the former, but let’s hope that a combination of new tools, a little luck and new staff whose open working practices have been formed outside staid businesses will gradually subvert OldSkool business.

This isn’t to propose a hippy utopia of careless, structure-free dossing at work. Rather, it’s a plea for openness, collaboration and peering within the enterprise. Fingers crossed.

Work.com… Maybe ‘web2.0’ means ‘second time round’?

Well well well. This site (thanks for the link, Torsten [linkedin] [blog]) brings back memories of BusinessEurope.com (RIP) and a couple of years working away at ‘how to guides’ (H2Gs) for SMEs.

Started in 2000, BE’s ambition was to be the information portal for Europe’s SMEs. The sites comprised (for a while) UK, German and French operations, but the combination of cost of content, cost of marketing, cost of operations and – ahem – total lack of willingness to pay on the part of SMEs rather doomed that model.

At the time we stumbled upon a previously-learned lesson and became a sort of ‘contract publisher’. By working on behalf of organisations who had to provide excellent, business-focused information (the DTI, Business Link, British Chambers of Commerce) and those who saw it as a valuable add-on (Banks, technology companies, business organisations) we found a profitable space. A small space, but at least profitable.

Looking at Work.com, however, we can see a new take on this. The software, systems and hardware are tending towards zero. The cost of content is limited since people contribute for PR or ‘guru point’ reasons. Quality and relevance are helped by a ratings system and having Work.com editorial staff (whose guides are distinguished with a ‘work.com staff’ imprimatur).

The business is also more networked from the outset, with each article offering quicklinks to Digg, delicious and to email. These offerings are now standard, yet I can remember the pain of having to code such capabilities ab initio even as late as 2003 (whereafter we switched to Plone as our CMS and got these capabilities ‘free’).

Interestingly, though, Work.com has so far not moved beyond being a static site: pick a topic, read it, rate it, leave.

The holy grail of business advice is making it actionable. To this end interactive diagnostic tools are vital (since in many cases people aren’t fully certain that they have the right question, and therefore can’t evaluate the “answer”). Furthermore, a step by step action workflow is necessary. Take the fraud prevention guide (picked at random): under the “Action Steps” it kindly offers deep links to other people’s online tools, checkups and CD-ROMs. However, this is ‘viewing’ not ‘doing’. Why, in a Web2.0 world, don’t these run on the site? Why not JFDI there and then?

There’s a fallacy that ‘filling the bucket’ with content items and guides is somehow a good thing. However, more is less. People have no shortage of other guides (all equally good), and can find these services via a quaint thing called Google.

My current view, were I to do this again, would be to launch with 12-20 deep, detailed, workflows for the biggest problems in business. I’d then add a couple a quarter, but would spend most effort in making each workflow industry-specific and country-specific. I’d also create lots of video of – seriously – form filling (think of the video on planes to the US on how to fill out the immigration cards). Thankfully, YouTube can do the heavy lifting there.

Businesses want reliable, worked-through, detailed and very, very real support for their basic requirements. After that, it’s all fun, learning and ‘development’.

In business support the ‘appearance of less’ is always more. Businesses will grudginly pay for solutions, but only advertisers will pay for to-do lists.