Techlightenment makes sense to me

Went to the techlightenment presentation at the Hub in King’s Cross last night, thanks to Deirdre. Nice people, interesting concept with very cool ROI case.

We are very social

We are very social

Their pitch: “Google don’t have a monopoly on groundbreaking approaches to online advertising. Indeed new techniques Techlightenment have pioneered are trumping Google in terms of cost per click (CPC), conversion rates and early stage reach.”

My response: “I like the idea that it combines the best of the ‘longtail’ concept with the best of mass marketing – aggregating small targeted audiences into a large more highly receptive audience (in fact I’ll use that line in my blog!)”.

How complexity can unify an understanding of community structure and behaviour

There’s been a great discussion about configuring forum discussions on e-mint recently (‘Discussions boards navigation/IA’), with one post from Ian Dickson sparking my interest on another level. He concluded his reply on the subject with the following ‘PS’: “it’s easier to simplify something that is overengineered than it is to complexify (?) something simple unless youn write off the older content.”

PaperPhoto by Stuart Glendinning Hall

Why is this of interest? Because it points to the value of a complexity approach in unifying the organic nature of an online community and and its structure. Sure, you might say, I could see why a bunch of people online can be seen in organic terms, but structure? But here’s the point. A motor engine is not complex its complicated, because its not based on organic principles, but mechanic ones. It also has none of the properties of self-regulation which an organic system has, hence the need for a control mechanism. But the structure of an online community can be designed along organic lines, based on simple parts which are assembled to form a complex whole. Seen in this complexity light Ian’s then in ideal terms it really is as straightforward to simply the complex as it is to make the simple complex. But what I suspect he means by ‘overengineered’ is in fact ‘complicated’. And in that sense I  agree with him. As it is very difficult to make the mechanically complicated simple. So that’s why its important to build it on complex lines in the first place. And with the bonus that it fits with the way you approach management of the community itself, along organic lines, encouraging self-regulation rather than seeking control as a way of unleashing the power of the community. Hey, it’s just theory, but thanks again to Deirdre’s original post and Ian’s reply for the inspiration!