<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Machiavelli works at Waggener-Edstrom</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/2007/03/machavelli-works-at-waggener-edstrom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/2007/03/machavelli-works-at-waggener-edstrom/</link>
	<description>Commentary on media, technology, marketing and clamming strategies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:04:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: site admin</title>
		<link>http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/2007/03/machavelli-works-at-waggener-edstrom/comment-page-1/#comment-69888</link>
		<dc:creator>site admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2007 23:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/?p=1108#comment-69888</guid>
		<description>Or give them all blogs and wikis and tell them not to shoot their toes off ....

Sorry. You&#039;re right. Too often I subscribe to &quot;lead the horse to water&quot; model and don&#039;t feel like evangelizing what I feel is obvious. Sort of the same mindset I took in 1994 when I told the biz dev guys at Forbes that they were morons to do a Prodigy/CompuServe deal when the Web was coming. I wound up managing the CompuServe project (and eventually got the website), but I should have spent more time educating and less time being &quot;change agent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or give them all blogs and wikis and tell them not to shoot their toes off &#8230;.</p>
<p>Sorry. You&#8217;re right. Too often I subscribe to &#8220;lead the horse to water&#8221; model and don&#8217;t feel like evangelizing what I feel is obvious. Sort of the same mindset I took in 1994 when I told the biz dev guys at Forbes that they were morons to do a Prodigy/CompuServe deal when the Web was coming. I wound up managing the CompuServe project (and eventually got the website), but I should have spent more time educating and less time being &#8220;change agent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mark</title>
		<link>http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/2007/03/machavelli-works-at-waggener-edstrom/comment-page-1/#comment-69874</link>
		<dc:creator>mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress/?p=1108#comment-69874</guid>
		<description>This is interesting.  Depending on where you stop penetrating the layers, changes who you think is pulling the strings and how deep the &quot;manipulation&quot; is.  This is like the plot of a fairly good con movie.  Maybe I come away with the conclusion that the PR firm helped to leak the doccument to create controversy (your point#2).  Everyone else is just operating and reacting to the layers on top of that, where other people stopped to make their arguements.

But, say for a moment that it is true that there is diversity of opinion within MS about social media efforts. Some cling to the previous PR / Analyst, press release model, while others want to take it to the streets in blogs, forums, etc.  Doesn&#039;t this dichotomy perhaps exist in most companies that weren&#039;t born on the web, or deal soley in media / content?

How does one drive change within the company?  A view I encountered yesterday over diner, was that as long as the web and communication execs &quot;get it&quot; then all is well.  I submit that it is more difficult if the awareness and participation is limited to the organizations that are formally charged with implementation.  

I&#039;d be a proponent of an &quot;imersion&quot; experiences outside executive&#039;s normal disciplines.  Send your financial, services, supply chain, even IT execs to a social media forum / convention.  Having them see &amp; hear first hand about the ways in which companies are getting close to their customers through blogs and forums, could accelerate change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is interesting.  Depending on where you stop penetrating the layers, changes who you think is pulling the strings and how deep the &#8220;manipulation&#8221; is.  This is like the plot of a fairly good con movie.  Maybe I come away with the conclusion that the PR firm helped to leak the doccument to create controversy (your point#2).  Everyone else is just operating and reacting to the layers on top of that, where other people stopped to make their arguements.</p>
<p>But, say for a moment that it is true that there is diversity of opinion within MS about social media efforts. Some cling to the previous PR / Analyst, press release model, while others want to take it to the streets in blogs, forums, etc.  Doesn&#8217;t this dichotomy perhaps exist in most companies that weren&#8217;t born on the web, or deal soley in media / content?</p>
<p>How does one drive change within the company?  A view I encountered yesterday over diner, was that as long as the web and communication execs &#8220;get it&#8221; then all is well.  I submit that it is more difficult if the awareness and participation is limited to the organizations that are formally charged with implementation.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;d be a proponent of an &#8220;imersion&#8221; experiences outside executive&#8217;s normal disciplines.  Send your financial, services, supply chain, even IT execs to a social media forum / convention.  Having them see &amp; hear first hand about the ways in which companies are getting close to their customers through blogs and forums, could accelerate change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
