(source: w3.org)

I recently came across this information that shows just how fast change is happening… The wave of mobile phone use is now rising to Tsunami heights so start paddling and get ready to surf!

“According to statistics from the market database Wireless Intelligence, it took about 20 years for the first billion mobile phones to sell worldwide. The second billion sold in four years, and the third billion sold in two. Eighty percent of the world’s population now lives within range of a cellular network, which is double the level in 2000. And figures from the International Telecommunications Union show that by the end of 2006, 68 percent of the world’s mobile subscriptions were in developing countries”
Source : The New York Times April 2008

An important edition to the ever-expanding Wiki-world, the book Wikinomics, by Dan Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, looks set to become the new bible for the business community.

The philosophy behind Wikinomics dates back to the 1930s when western economists decided that individuals should compete in a free market and that planned economies (such as Stalin’s) were doomed to failure.

A young socialist academic, by the name of Ronald Coase, disagreed with the economists, arguing that if this was the case, why did huge companies exist with centralized operations and planning. His theory, for which he won a Nobel Prize, was that making things requires collaboration and as a result, companies emerge because the cheapest way to collaborate is to gather human resources, tools and materials under one roof.

In Wikinomics, the authors discuss the ways in which mass collaboration continues to change the methods that companies are using to harness skills and knowledge to innovate and increase funds.

The more successful companies share information and resources and focus their efforts on four powerful new ideas: openness, peering, sharing and acting globally.

And now that the internet is radically lowering the cost of collaborating, big companies are losing their edge and small ones can compete without the need to become a massive organization.

“Collaboration can occur on an astronomical scale, so if you can create an encyclopedia with a bunch of people, could you create a mutual fund, a motorcycle?” asks Tapscott.

Wikinomics gives several examples of such successful, wikinomic ventures, including the Chinese motorcycle industry, which has tripled its output in 10 years thanks to the online collaboration of hundreds of small firms.

If there are any criticisms to be made of this book, it is that it presents no downsides to the wiki world whatsoever and may leave less discerning readers unaware of the fact that wiki is anything less than perfect.

The book fails to mention why some wiki movements have worked and others have not, or that wikis cannot be trusted for solid information on politics, news and history. The authors are also quick to dismiss worries that wikis can devolve when a smart mob develops a kind of “mass stupidity” (giving the example of the Stalinist movement).

However, criticisms aside, Wikinomics is an ideal starting point for organizations that want to formalize their collective intelligence and could really help businesses to move forward.

For further information or to contribute to the Wikinomics playbook, the first peer-produced guide to business in the 21st Century, check out the authors’ website, www.wikinomics.com.

(Review by Ashley Baldwin for www.marceloiniarra.com )

With the gap between the United States Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama closing fast, both sides have resorted to tight digital campaigns in order to get one-up on the competition.

This has really emphasised to me how much stiff competition and the necessity to stay ahead of the game leads even the money-richest to such amazing creativity. Because at the end of the day, the more individualized a campaign and the more you can reach out to a wide audience, the more success you are likely to have.

Clinton’s website, www.hillaryclinton.com, is the gateway to Hillary Clinton communities across the web with links to her profiles on Myspace, Youtube, Facebook and many more Hillary-related sights.

Followers are also kept up to date with a campaign blog, newsroom and video diary so that they can see exactly what their candidate of choice is getting up to.
The website also contains a “Help Make History” section, where members of “Team Hillary” can make their own personal contribution to the campaign, assisting with fundraising, event planning and even by joining a massive online call-centre to drum up support for Clinton over the phone.

As far as Barack Obama is concerned, while his personal website is only slightly less sophisticated than Hillary Clinton’s his “Yes We Can” music video, compiled by Bob Dylan’s son, Jesse, and featuring celebrities such as Scarlett Johansson and Aisha Tyler, is very much likely to strike a cord with young Americans. And his emphasis on “I’m asking you to believe” empowerment speeches certainly evoke sentiments of Martin Luther King and all that that implies. The mobile section of Obama’s site , is one of the stars of this campaign. Check out his ringtones, currently some of the most popular in the US. The mobile phone battle field was Twitter where Mr. Barack is beating Hillary 9 to 1 in numbers of mobile followers. Will the election go the same way?

This reversion to ultra-creativity in times of need is particularly typical of developing countries, where economic instability means that businesses and associations must resort to creativity for an edge on their North American and European counterparts.

In fact, it has been noted that most successful social sector campaigns initially arise from ideas presented by the residents of developing countries who are used to working creatively as a means of survival within the field.

The pressure to survive in a savage environment is once again shown to be a driver of innovation in the US democratic elections. Go Hillary and Obama! Time’s running out!!

Kiva.org and Donorschoose.org were given special attention in the pages of this month’s Fortune Magazine with their open frontiers approach to fundraising rapidly gaining popularity online.

And what do these two organizations have in common?

Decentralization… In other words, they get rid of the middleman between the people that need help and the people that want to help.

For example, let’s take the case of Peter Mukasa. Peter is the owner of a tiny liquor store in the Ugandan village of Makindye. Things have been going badly recently, and he needs $250 to stock his shelves. One afternoon in November, he posts a funding request on Kiva.org and within hours, ten lenders have given $25 each to help Peter’s business get back on its feet.

Donorschoose.org follows a similar format but with a focus on the US public education system and with donations rather than loans. Teachers post classroom projects that they need financial assistance with and donors can select the project that most inspires them.

With standard charities taking significant percentages of donated dollars, and donors never knowing exactly how their money is being spent, Kiva and Donorschoose provide users with the vital information that they have been lacking, connecting them directly to the project and bringing the financial and humanitarian aspects of a charity together in a way that has never before been conceived.

This was a concept that I used for my “Defending the Whales” project for Greenpeace International, which gave people the opportunity to organize their own campaign to stop whaling. It is amazing how much more effective a campaign can be when it offers direct involvement rather than assuming total responsibility over supporters and their donations.

It is clear that the nonprofit sector is changing rapidly, with new media breaking frontiers and giving the public access to the Peter Mukasa’s of the world that only social organizations could previously reach.

If this continues to develop, how will the role of traditional NGOs change? How will established non-profit organizations move forward to accommodate all of this new media, especially when very few are even taking it seriously.

But associations like Kiva.org and donorchoose do mean serious business and have the success rates to back it up.
Perhaps a quote that I heard from Tom Peters in a seminar would help established NGOs to think about the impact of new approaches in social change:
“The best swordsman in the
world doesn’t need to fear the second best swordsman in
the world; no, the person for him to be afraid of is some ignorant antagonist who has never had a sword in his hand before; he doesn’t do the thing he ought to do, and so the expert isn’t prepared for him; he does the thing he ought
not to do and often it catches the expert out
and ends him on the spot.” —Mark Twain

The Chinese Government’s recent bizarre decision to block Youtube is further evidence of the site’s massive influence, an influence that social organizations should be tapping in to.

The ruling, which was made in order to prevent the international broadcast of protests in Tibet, will affect 210 million users in China. Yes, you read it, 210.000.000 internet users!

Youtube , created just three years ago, is already the second most visited website in the world.. It has also been found to be the site of choice for criminal bands in Mexico. Some even use their accounts to broadcast footage of kidnapped victims, which is exactly what happened in the case of Luis Fierro from Atoyac. A user from a rival gang uploaded video footage of Mr. Fierro with the intention of exhorting his family and friends to pay for his rescue. (This case confirms the rule that Innovation often starts with the illegal use of a tool )

But criminals and communist goverments are not the only ones aware of Youtube’s impact. Independent and non-traditional NGOs have quickly realised the value of this tool and are reaping the benefits of being able to reach such a wide audience, quickly, easily and completely free of charge! One of the most outstanding social sector campaign videos, Juan Mann’s “Free Hugs”, has received almost 25 million views, a figure yet to be beaten by any other non-profit.

It appears that it is the larger NGOs that are still lagging behind, unable to see the value of such an instant, massive audience and user generated content. But with Youtube.com receiving an average of 20% of all global internet visits per month , what on earth are they waiting for?

More in how to implement succesfull web TV strategies in future posts ! Stay tune..