KIDENDEI SEGERETI

All intranet efforts start out with the best intentions. Organizations envision an information hub for their community made up of easy to find websites that are simple to create and maintain. A one-stop shop for all their information needs, if you will. Many of these efforts fail, causing the end users to shudder at the mere mention of such an attempt again. And for government organizations, there are additional challenges when creating an intranet as part of a Digital Government Strategy. This got me thinking about the top three challenges public sector agencies are facing with intranet efforts:

1. Technology enables content proliferation without organization

The most commonly available technology in this space makes it very easy to spin up content that, in turn, creates pretty links to -- you guessed it -- yet more content. As if that weren’t bad enough, the search utilities which accompany most intranets (and indeed most communities generally) are woefully inadequate to assist users in finding the content they seek.
The next thing you know you have an unwieldy beast that lacks a consistent user interface and contains next to impossible to find content. This rapid proliferation of content with no consistent guidelines, design standards or a structured database underneath it can defeat the purpose of such an effort, killing productivity -- and most likely the entire project.

2. Security, Security, Security

It is only natural that a system meant to share information in a world where information has to be protected is a very real concern. The intranet has to be locked down tight to the outside world where necessary and users must be managed according to their appropriate level of access; people must only be able to see, contribute, and share things they are authorized to. It gets even more complicated when intra-agency communication is desired, so not quite to the outside world, but not just to those particular agencies. When creating and maintaining an intranet is already challenging at times, adding security can be completely overwhelming and maybe even paralyzing. Unfortunately, many times the necessary permission structure isn’t thought through until late in the launch process which can create a security and permission management nightmare.

3. Keeping up with the constant evolution of intranet technology

Forums, message boards, Myspace, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, microblogs, Tumblr, user groups, communities of practices… So many ways to communicate and share. How do you keep up? To stay ahead of the proliferation isn’t just taming the lack of organization we spoke about earlier, it’s also about not making the evolution of your intranet beyond painful. Once that happens, you will risk your users going elsewhere, and when they start going to public places like Facebook or LinkedIn, security is completely out of your control.

Drupal, an open-source Content Management System, is often chosen to help power public sector websites, because it helps keep the information and content vital to the website organized, well structured, and easy to use and reuse. It also allows for the consistent creation of websites through theming. In a sector that is naturally rich with content and structured in such a way that the flow of information is already determined, it makes sense that so many use Drupal to help them corral and distribute it. So why not take it one step further than a website, and do what many in the technology sector themselves have already done, and build a community with Drupal. In addition, Drupal is very secure, used by many public sector organizations as well as many in commercial enterprise.

CYBER LEARNING

BY PROTAS LEVINA BAPRM 42657
The purpose of the Cyberlearning and Future Learning Technologies program is to integrate opportunities offered by emerging technologies with advances in what is known about how people learn to advance three interconnected thrusts:

The term “cyberlearning” reflects a growing national interest in managing the interactions of technology and education, especially with respect to the use of networking and information technologies. However, there is little agreement about what the term means. Such disagreements reflect underlying differences in beliefs about the purposes of education. These disagreements are problematic for anyone interested in evaluating cyberlearning practices. This study used surveys and interviews to investigate how practitioners and experts in the field of cyberlearning define it, how they implement it and what they believe its purpose to be. Little agreement was found among participants in terms of their definitions of cyberlearning, which was supported by the wide variety of practices labeled “cyberlearning.” Although most participants emphasized the purpose of cyberlearning as a form of content delivery, an often-passionate minority argued for the potential of cyberlearning to encourage a shift away from content-delivery paradigms. The participants’ spoke from a variety of perspectives about cyberlearning including as educators, designers, activists, and policymakers, which led them to construct diverse narratives about the purposes and problems facing education and education policy. While the differences in embodied in these narratives remain an important consideration, some emerging points of convergence are identified.

·         Innovation: inventing and improving next-generation genres (types) of learning technologies, identifying new means of using technology for fostering and assessing learning, and proposing new ways of integrating learning technologies with each other and into learning environments to foster and assess learning;

·         Advancing understanding of how people learn in technology-rich learning environments: enhancing understanding of how people learn and how to better foster and assess learning, especially in technology-rich learning environments that offer new opportunities for learning and through data collection and computational modeling of learners and groups of learners that can be done only in such environments; and

·         Promoting broad use and transferability of new genres: extracting lessons from experiences with these technologies that can inform design and use of new genres across disciplines, populations, and learning environments; advancing understanding of how to foster learning through effective use these new technologies and the environments they are integrated into.

The intention of this program is to advance technologies that specifically focus on the experiences of learners; innovations that simply focus on making teaching easier will not be funded. Proposals that focus on teachers or facilitators as learners are invited; the aim in these proposals should be to help teachers and facilitators learn to make the learning experiences of learners more effective.

Proposals are expected to address all three of the program's thrusts. Of particular interest are technological advances that (1) foster deep understanding of content coordinated with masterful learning of practices and skills; (2) draw in and encourage learning among populations not served well by current educational practices; and/or (3) provide new ways of assessing understanding, engagement, and capabilities of learners. It is expected that research funded by this program will shed light on how technology can enable new forms of educational practice. This program does not support proposals that aim simply to implement and evaluate a particular software application or technology in support of a specific course.

Awards will be made in three research categories, each focusing on a different stage of research and development: Exploration (EXP), Design and Implementation (DIP), and Integration (INT). The program will also support small Capacity-Building Projects (CAP), e.g., conferences, workshops, and partnership-building activities, and will continue to participate in NSF's Foundation-Wide programs: EAGER, RAPID, INSPIRE, and CAREER.

Why and How PR needs to evolve in the Digital Age:
by KIDENDEI SEGERETI

Influencer Marketing

We all recognize that we live in a world where people consume and share information in a very different way than they did just 10 years ago. There is no need to convince anyone of the impact the internet, social media, and mobile devices have had in business and in life. And still, in most companies, the PR function has not evolved in almost a century.

Only a few years ago, information sources were centralized. People got their news from a handful of newspapers, magazines, and TV stations. Reporters writing for these news outlets were the main source of information. They were, in a sense, a bottleneck or a monopoly in buyer opinion and education. Inside a company, the public relations function was the practice of informing and influencing these reporters with the intention of getting favorable news coverage.

Today, this is an obsolete paradigm as newspapers are moving from print to digital or going out of business. An article printed in this morning's newspaper is not news anymore, it is history. We learn about the news in real-time via Twitter, Facebook or online news feeds. Millions of amateur and professional writers have become publishers thanks to blogging platforms and other social media channels. Anyone can write news. The problem in the world today is that we have too many news sources, too much to read and too many point of views.

Everyone is empowered to influence. Any really good story can go 'viral', spreading faster and broader than what traditional public relations was able do years ago. Good examples include “United Breaks Guitars" and “Comcast Tech Sleeping on my Couch' which had millions of views, which then resulted in news coverage. In some cases, social news transformed the organizations that were at fault for these incidents.

The Public Relation function needs to evolve

It would be logical then to conclude that the original charter of the public relations function is insufficient in today’s world. A broader lens is required. If PR is the function responsible for influencing opinion through broad reach, a new definition is required, one that takes into account how people form opinion and how information spreads (and is shared).

Recognizing the need to modernize the definition of PR, in 2012 The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) crafted a new definition for the practice. Their new definition states “Public relations is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their publics.” This statement pretty much exemplifies what is wrong with PR today.

The Wikipedia definition of PR can be found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_relations, and can be summarized as spreading information with the goal of persuading around a point of view. I like this one much better, maybe because it is essentially the same I wrote above, simplified as influencing opinion through broad reach.

PR is Influencer Relations

If the true goal of PR is to influence then it needs to evolve into an influencer relations function. The concept of influencers is based on the idea that in almost every market or area of knowledge, there are a small group of people who have a disproportionate ability to influence how people think. This is the concept explored in Malcom Gladwel’s The Tipping Point where he classifies influencers as connectors, mavens and salesmen based on their reach, knowledge, and ability to persuade or influence.

An influencer has a combination of three elements: a unique point of view or perceived knowledge on the particular topic or credibility, ability to influence how people think about an issue, and connections or reach that allows their salesmanship to reach many people. Reach, credibility, and salesmanship: the higher these three factors, the higher the influence potential of an individual.

It is important to consider why PR needs to focus on a small number of people rather than try to go after the entire public directly. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, this function is about personal relationships or at least personal connections and interactions, which are not scalable. Secondly, reaching masses of people to persuade is what advertising does, in a very impersonal way.

Using this definition, the press is still influential. However, there are other groups of influencers that PR needs to pay attention to (and build ‘mutually beneficial relationships’ with). In today’s world, influencers include the press, bloggers, authors, key customers, industry analysts, and more.

To build a complete list of the influencers that matter for your organization, one could take a more practical approach. Taking on the perspective of a business that is trying to sell a product or service and building a list of influencers requires first understanding how customers make purchasing decisions, and second, understanding what experts they rely on for making these decisions. An influencer is someone who helps other people buy from you. This is the simplest definition, and the most practical for marketers.

Advocacy is the goal of Influencer relations.

Once these groups of influencers have been identified, and often assigned to people or teams (analyst relations, blogger relations, etc.) and plan to influence, each influencer group must be defined. Influencer marketing usually involves a personal approach that must be focused on helping influencers do their job, satisfy their curiosity, or play to their ego.

Influencers are “turned-on” by empowering them to be advocates. But you can’t buy advocacy (don’t even try). You must be authentic and helpful to earn the opportunity to be listened to by an influencer. You must understand what drives them. How can you help them achieve their goals in the context of your products or services?

Influencers are often driven by status: recognition is more important than monetary rewards. Helping them grow their knowledge is a great way to be helpful. One way to do this is by providing early access to products and the highest levels of expertise in your organization.

Three last points on influence:

• Popularity is not influence. Justin Bieber, Charlie Sheen and Miley Cyrus are popular. They have millions of followers on social networks. And yet, the public is not necessarily going to take advice from them on anything of importance (I sure hope not). Remember, reach, credibility, and salesmanship are required to be an influencer.
• Influence is contextual. Most of my friends will buy a camera I recommend because I have credibility as a good amateur photographer. The same friends would not take my advice on fashion or politics. Influence is determined by the credibility one has in a particular field of knowledge or context
• Anyone can be an influencer. Passion is the essence of influence. Any person has some level of influence in the areas he or she is passionate about. Someone who is passionate about cooking, for example, will probably build the contextual credibility to be in influencer – limited only by their reach and salesmanship.

Influencer relations is most effective when it works together with other areas of marketing. A good example of influencer relations, media relations, and content marketing working together is the Lumia campaign Nokia is running with National Geographic, where they work with recognized photographers (influencers) and a media property with broad reach and a reputation for great photography (contextual influence) to promote a product in a very credible way (salesmanship).

The Impact of the Internet on Society: A Global Perspective

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, and with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in bandwidth, efficiency, and price.

People, companies, and institutions feel the depth of this technological change, but the speed and scope of the transformation has triggered all manner of utopian and dystopian perceptions that, when examined closely through methodologically rigorous empirical research, turn out not to be accurate. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of isolation, alienation, and withdrawal from society, but available evidence shows that the Internet neither isolates people nor reduces their sociability; it actually increases sociability, civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures.

Our current “network society” is a product of the digital revolution and some major sociocultural changes. One of these is the rise of the “Me-centered society,” marked by an increased focus on individual growth and a decline in community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. But individuation does not mean isolation, or the end of community. Instead, social relationships are being reconstructed on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects. Community is formed through individuals’ quests for like-minded people in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace, and the local space.

Globally, time spent on social networking sites surpassed time spent on e-mail in November 2007, and the number of social networking users surpassed the number of e-mail users in July 2009. Today, social networking sites are the preferred platforms for all kinds of activities, both business and personal, and sociability has dramatically increased but it is a different kind of sociability. Most Facebook users visit the site daily, and they connect on multiple dimensions, but only on the dimensions they choose. The virtual life is becoming more social than the physical life, but it is less a virtual reality than a real virtual, facilitating real-life work and urban living.

 The Impact of the Internet on Society: A Global Perspective

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, and with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in bandwidth, efficiency, and price.

People, companies, and institutions feel the depth of this technological change, but the speed and scope of the transformation has triggered all manner of Utopian and dystonia perceptions that, when examined closely through methodologically rigorous empirical research, turn out not to be accurate. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of isolation, alienation, and withdrawal from society, but available evidence shows that the Internet neither isolates people nor reduces their sociability; it actually increases sociability, civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures.

Our current “network society” is a product of the digital revolution and some major sociocultural changes. One of these is the rise of the “Me-centered society,” marked by an increased focus on individual growth and a decline in community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. But individuation does not mean isolation, or the end of community. Instead, social relationships are being reconstructed on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects. Community is formed through individuals’ quests for like-minded people in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace, and the local space.

Globally, time spent on social networking sites surpassed time spent on e-mail in November 2007, and the number of social networking users surpassed the number of e-mail users in July 2009. Today, social networking sites are the preferred platforms for all kinds of activities, both business and personal, and sociability has dramatically increased but it is a different kind of sociability. Most Facebook users visit the site daily, and they connect on multiple dimensions, but only on the dimensions they choose. The virtual life is becoming more social than the physical life, but it is less a virtual reality than a real virtual, facilitating real-life work and urban living.

 The Impact of the Internet on Society: A Global Perspective

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, and with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in bandwidth, efficiency, and price.

People, companies, and institutions feel the depth of this technological change, but the speed and scope of the transformation has triggered all manner of utopian and dystopian perceptions that, when examined closely through methodologically rigorous empirical research, turn out not to be accurate. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of isolation, alienation, and withdrawal from society, but available evidence shows that the Internet neither isolates people nor reduces their sociability; it actually increases sociability, civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures.

Our current “network society” is a product of the digital revolution and some major socio-cultural changes. One of these is the rise of the “Me-centered society,” marked by an increased focus on individual growth and a decline in community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. But individuation does not mean isolation, or the end of community. Instead, social relationships are being reconstructed on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects. Community is formed through individuals’ quests for like-minded people in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace, and the local space.

Globally, time spent on social networking sites surpassed time spent on e-mail in November 2007, and the number of social networking users surpassed the number of e-mail users in July 2009. Today, social networking sites are the preferred platforms for all kinds of activities, both business and personal, and sociability has dramatically increased — but it is a different kind of sociability. Most Facebook users visit the site daily, and they connect on multiple dimensions, but only on the dimensions they choose. The virtual life is becoming more social than the physical life, but it is less a virtual reality than a real virtual, facilitating real-life work and urban living.

 BY KYEJU DIANA BAPRM 42589

Proper management of Corporate Communication

Corporate communication is a set of activities involved in managing and orchestrating all internal and external communications aimed at creating favorable point of view among stakeholders on which the company depends.  It is the messages issued by a corporate organization, body, or institute to its audiences, such as employees, media, channel partners and the general public. Organizations aim to communicate the same message to all its stakeholders, to transmit coherence, credibility and ethic. Corporate Communications help organizations explain their mission, combine its many visions and values into a cohesive message to stakeholders. The concept of corporate communication could be seen as an integrative communication structure linking stakeholders to the organization.

Corporate communication is the process of communicating with stakeholders such as customers, employees, suppliers, investors and journalists so that they gain a better understanding of your company. Effective corporate communication helps to build a positive attitude toward your company and improves your chances of market success. Companies that are recognized and trusted in the market place are likely to obtain more sales opportunities.

Step 1

Identify your target audience. 

Include the stakeholders that have the greatest influence on the success of your business. Make customers aware of your product range and your capability as a reliable supplier. Build enthusiasm and commitment among your employees. Strengthen relationships with suppliers by convincing them of the value of working with your company to build stronger relationships. Build confidence in investors and financial analysts to ensure funding for your business. Cultivate relationships with journalists to build a positive reputation for the business.

Step 2

Carry out preliminary research to identify attitudes and levels of awareness among stakeholders. Monitor social networking sites, blogs and media that mention your company or your products. Ask your sales representatives for their views on levels of customer awareness. Compare understanding and awareness levels with the levels you would like to achieve. Identify any areas where there is poor understanding or awareness as a basis for prioritizing corporate communication.

Step 3

Develop a plan for your corporate communication program. 

Set objectives based on your preliminary research and your communication priorities. Examples of objectives include “make customers aware of your new product development program,” “raise awareness of customer care among employees,” and “convince investors that your company has a viable future.” Outline the communication activities that you will use to meet the objectives, including press releases on new products or customer wins case studies on customer successes and financial press releases on annual results, management appointments or major investments.

Step 4

Choose media that reach your stakeholders cost effectively. 

Distributing press releases to local newspapers, for example, is a low-cost way of communicating with employees and local customers and suppliers. Your website is also an important medium. Post company information of interest to different stakeholders. Set up a forum and allow customers, employees and others to post comments about your products and the company. Respond to the comments to build dialogue with stakeholders.

 BY PROTAS LEVINA BAPRM 42657

How the Digital Age Has Shaped Communication Management

The digital age is rapidly changing communications management in astronomical ways. Everything is digitized now. All businesses are online, and each of them uses social media for all kinds of communication. Come to think of it, the latest statistics show 87% increase in the use of social media platforms. It is believed that this number will increase in the next 5 years.

I was awed with another number. The huge figure representing that many adults went online. Furthermore, 52% of companies use social media to connect and communicate with customers. This only means one thing the way business communicates with the customer has changed forever. When a company needs to engage its market, it sends tweets, or creates eye catching statuses on face book. If it needs to expound on matters i.e. updates, important developments, or new product launches, and social media limits the execution, then they can blog about them on their sites.

How well are you keeping up with the changes in the digital communication landscape? It's one of the unique challenges presented to businesses today understanding and incorporating the various developments and changes in digital communication. Blogs, Social Media, and Micro Blogs it can be extremely overwhelming. According to the info graph below, 87% of businesses are using social media, but only 58% have adopted blogging, which suggests that many business owners still haven't come to grips with the nature of digital marketing today.

What's more telling is that only 58% of businesses are using social media to provide ways for customers to interact with a company. Yet a growing number of customers expect to be able to hop on a Face book Page or send a Tweet and get an answer. Businesses who aren't paying attention to customers on social networks (social listening) are missing key conversations and opportunities.

Take a look at how the digital landscape is changing and being used, throughout the world, and think about how your own business fits in. Effective communication lies at the heart of a successful business. Without being able to communicate, a team will have more difficulty accomplishing goals and interacting with customers. For this and many other reasons, communication management is an important area of study and mastery.

The digital age has brought real-time, 24-hour communication between businesses, employees and customers to the forefront. What is the result of this digital shift? Maintaining positive relationships with both employees and customer’s means keeping up with an ever evolving digital world.

Each year, the world becomes increasingly digitized, and anyone in the business of communications which is to say, most everyone who touches social media must stay aware of the landscape.

 BY WILBROD REGINA BAPRM 42683

CHARACTERISTICS OF CREATIVE INDUSTRIES

by KIDENDEI SEGERETI S.

CHARACTERISTICS OF CREATIVE INDUSTRIES

1. Nobody knows principle : Demand uncertainty
exists because the consumers' reaction to a
product are neither known beforehand, nor
easily understood afterward.
2. Art for art’s sake : Workers care about
originality, technical professional skill, harmony,
etc. of creative goods and are willing to settle
for lower wages than offered by 'humdrum'
jobs.
3. Motley crew principle : For relatively complex
creative products e.g., films the production
requires diversely skilled inputs. Each skilled
input must be present and perform at some
minimum level to produce a valuable outcome.
4. Infinite variety : Products are differentiated
by quality and uniqueness; each product is a
distinct combination of inputs leading to infinite
variety options (e.g., works of creative writing,
whether poetry, novel, screenplays or
otherwise).
5. A list/B list: Skills are vertically
differentiated. Artists are ranked on their
skills, originality, and proficiency in creative
processes and or products. Small differences in
skills and talent may yield huge differences in
(financial) success.
6. Time flies: When coordinating complex
projects with diversely skilled inputs, time is of
the essence.
7. Ars longa : Some creative products have
durability aspects that invoke copyright
protection, allowing a creator or performer to
collect rents.
The properties described by Caves have been
criticized for being too rigid Not
all creative workers are purely driven by 'art
for art's sake'. T property also
holds for certain noncreative products The 'time flies' property also
holds for large construction projects. Creative
industries are therefore not unique, but they
score generally higher on these properties
relative to noncreative industries.