Showing posts with label innovation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label innovation. Show all posts

Monday, November 30, 2009

Should our professional identities be kept separate from our social life?


Should our professional identities be kept separate from our social life?

This question is definitely relevant within the domain of personal branding, but I would like to approach this question from a place of mindful inquiry.

When I linked my Twitter to my personal profile on Facebook, one of my friends made a comment suggesting that many of her friends on Twitter had chosen to keep the two separate. And more recently, I volunteered to help with the promotions of a community event for which I created really cool invites, which were sent out with my signature including my professional credentials. Again, I was asked by a colleague, if it wouldn't be better to send the invite out without my credentials as this was coming from my "casual, neighborhood personality and not business." A very good question.

What do you think? Do you keep your identities separate - is your professional persona different from your social one? When you volunteer are you one person and when you provide the same service in a professional setting are you a different person?

From personal branding perspective, you would want to promote your personal brand across all dimensions of your life and the answer is quite simple in that case - you keep your signature consistent in all your communications.

Assuming you do put your professional signature on all communications - even your social and personal ones - wouldn't that make you a pushy marketer?

Here in lies potential for inner conflict and fragmentation and choosing to go one way over the other without mindful inquiry would lead to a decision that is not authentic and optimal. I would encourage you too to meditate on this question and find what feels true to you. You may be amazed with what you find in yourself, beliefs that are holding you back from your highest expression of Self.

I will share my truth on this subject. I see my Self as compassionate, creative, and mindful and that is who I am across all aspects of my life and with all people in my life. Separating my identities into social and professional to me is creating false identifications and fragmentation, which is not my experience of who I am. I am innovative, authentic, mindful. Period.

Should I feel guilty in promoting my work when I volunteer in my community? In my head, letting people know who I am is not a bad things because I am providing valuable service and would like people to know what solutions I can provide to make their lives better. Of course, if promoting my work becomes the priority in my volunteer work, then I am not being true to the task at hand and would feel inauthentic to me. So, if doing my best job as a volunteer allows people to know what I have to offer professionally, I think we have a win win situation here :)

I believe our lives should rest on win win situations and that is only possible if we are mindful (not operating out of guilt and limiting beliefs), authentic, and innovative (because fining win win situations often requires thinking out of the box and getting out of our comfort zones.)

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Is Embracing Diversity In Spaghetti Sauce "The Surer Way To True Happiness"?

This post is my initial reaction to a Ted's video featuring Malcolm Gladwell that I have posted on website.

In this talk, Malcolm Gladwell, author of the Tipping Point and Blink, acknowledges Howard Maskowitz for his contributions to business and to consumers. Howard Maskowitz was hired in the 80’s by Campbell to help with Prego, which was struggling against Ragu, the top brand in spaghetti sauce at the time. His market research revealed that there is no one best kind of product and instead the company needs to cluster their customers to understand what product will satisfy each group. Based on his advice Prego came up with the first extra chunky spaghetti sauce, which was an instant success and over the next 10 years they made over 600 million dollars selling super chunky spaghetti sauce.

And that’s when you started getting seven different kinds of vinegar, and 14 different kinds of mustard, and 71 different kinds of olive oil…That’s Howard’s doing. That is Howard’s gift to the American people.” And from diversity in product offerings, Gladwell jumps to embracing diversity in people as a sure way to happiness. His whole talk at Ted’s is about variety in spaghetti sauce and all the products we find in the super market today to meet consumers’ diverse needs and that he believes is what will make people happy? It is not about the artificial ingredients and genetically modified ingredients put in the sauce to make it appealing to a particular cluster but it is about providing choice and doing what ever it takes to make your customer happy, in the short run at least. Because we all know in the long run, it takes more than spaghetti sauce made with artificial ingredients to keep you healthy and therfore happy.

Indeed, Howard had some remarkable insights about how consumers’ responses in surveys can be misleading. And yes, consumers can be clustered according to their preferences. But is the best we can do and talk about is how to sell more spaghetti sauce? Why do the innovators and great minds not use their insights to improve consumer health and well being? For example, how can we cluster people to make mindfulness practices more appealing? How can we ensure that the products we offer cater to the health of the customers and the environment? What kind of innovations in the distribution system can ensure that there is more equitable distribution so that both waste and scarcity are eliminated?

How can we use innovations in marketing to improve not only your business but also the well being of your customers, employees, suppliers, and the environment? I believe there is a way…

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

The Meeting of The Walmarts, The Whole Foods, And The CSA’s Of Academia:Transformative Consumer Research Shapes New Paradigm


TCR: The Health Track
Be Do and Let Go

Driving back from the second Transformative Consumer Research (TCR) Conference at Villanova University, still buzzing with the excitement of a new paradigm that is emerging in marketing academia, I felt that the conference was like a meeting of the Walmarts, the Whole Foods, and the CSA’s of marketing academia. Before I explain what I mean by that I want to commend the leadership behind this conference for stimulating a new vision for consumer research. The conference brought together consumer researchers and practitioners from diverse backgrounds with the purpose of stimulating research and actions to alleviate the most pressing social and economic problems around the world. The sponsors of the conference, the Halloran Philanthropies and BeDo, posed three questions to the researchers:

1) Where are you now?
2) Where do you want to go?
3) How will you get there?

In the spirit of the questions posed by the sponsors, I am writing my thoughts to provoke readers to reflect on the following questions:

1) Who are you?
2) What impact do you have on this world?
3) What impact would you like to have on this world?
4) How will you have the desired impact on this world?

The purpose of writing this is to inspire self-reflection as researchers and the stimulation of a new marketing paradigm that is consistent with the purpose of TCR and Halloran Philanthropies of building “the world we all want.”

This conference to me was transformational because for the first time it brought together such a diverse group of people to engage in a dialog to better the world. Most marketing conferences are brief one-way presentations of a research project, followed by quick transitions in small clusters to bars for drinking. Don’t get me wrong, I am not against drinking, but I have always missed the two-way dialog between researchers passionate about a project that impacts the world in positive ways. The second unique feature in this conference was the bringing together of people who are doing similar purpose-driven work but would not have met in conventional conference style settings. Please also read what Craig Lefebvre, a colleague at the conference, also wrote to this effect.

Speaking of diversity, I use Walmarts, Whole Foods, and CSAs as metaphors to reflect the diversity among consumer researchers with respect to their purpose, research output, and impact in the real world. I use the metaphor of Walmarts to represent the high turnover but low impact researchers; In the Whole Foods,’ category, I include the academics who have created a balance between turnover and research that is meaningful, but is exclusive and limited to niche areas; And then there are the CSA’s, which metaphorically represents researchers who have high impact through meaningful research and high involvement in the classroom, but low turnover. I do not intend to see these as mutually exclusive categories but allowing for overlaps. There are advantages and disadvantages to each group and the TCR promises a new mindset that integrates the benefits of each group without the limitations. Each of these groups and the integrated paradigm are discussed next.

Wal-Mart Goes Green

The TCR conference drew many consumer researchers with impressive resumes including a long list of articles published in top marketing journals. This group of researchers comprised well-trained researchers trained by other well-trained researchers who have learned the skills and procedures for turning around research articles expeditiously, mostly using experimental design. Are these research articles read by anyone other than the elite circle of researchers themselves and whether they impact the world in any way are questions that may not be of interest to this group, as I discovered in my conversations with some of them. And if their work is not guided by the desire to make a difference, I wondered about their motivation to be at the conference. My conversations with some of my colleagues in this group reminded me of Wal-Mart’s growing interest in green and organic product lines. Certainly, when a retailer as big as Wal-Mart turns its attention to green and organic offerings, it has wide spread implications. This will force many big suppliers’ like Kellogg to create new organic lines and it will also bring down prices because of the economies in production and distribution afforded by Wal-Mart. Yet, as pointed out in a New York Times article, some organic food advocates fear that Wal-Mart is adopting organic product lines without embracing the principles underlying organic foods, which can have negative repercussions in the long run. For example, large-scale organic farmers will not use the crop-rotation practices of the small farms, hurting the fields and reducing the health benefits of organic food. Similarly, how the entry of consumer researchers into transformative research areas will impact academia and the world it seeks to change, without a change in their inner purpose and philosophical underpinnings of research and their role as academics, is something left to speculation.

Whole Foods No Longer Unique

With Wal-Mart’s entry into the organic array, Whole Foods is losing its unique positioning as a retailer of organic foods. Especially, in a recession Wal-Mart’s price advantage makes it more attractive. Whole Foods has been retaliating with cost-cutting initiatives and changing people’s perceptions that the store’s nickname shouldn’t be “whole check” (Business Week 2009). This phenomenon can be transferred to consumer research metaphorically to reflect an increasing focus in areas of research that are beneficial to society and are no longer niche areas. This has drawn more good researchers into public policy areas, which has improved the standards of research as reflected in journals like Journal of Public Policy and Marketing. So far policy researchers had been doing a good job of creating a balance between research that is meaningful and the quality of work, but with more people entering this area, there are more people with higher research standards and how the traditional policy researchers will defend their area of expertise remains to be seen.

What is a CSA anyway?

CSA stands for community supported agriculture. Over the last 20 years, CSA has become a popular way for consumers to buy local, seasonal food directly from the farmer. It typically involves an arrangement in which consumers pay the farmer in advance for their share in the produce which is harvested once a week for pick up during the season. A recent article in the Salt Lake Tribune (2009) cites food activist Michael Pollan, the author of The Omnivore's Dilemma, as saying, “We need more highly skilled small farmers in more places all across America - not as a matter of nostalgia for the agrarian past, but as a matter of national security.” I see a need for more consumer researchers passionate about making a difference in the world. Like CSA’s, these researchers work in complete harmony with their values, which are consistent and fully integrated with who they are. Their work is an outer manifestation of who are inside. They use a mindful approach, which is an authentic expression of who they are and not a strategy to get publications, and as such reflects in all aspects of their life. A potential shortcoming of this approach is that such researchers often work alone because it was hard to find other researchers who are equally impassioned by the same social cause. In the past, these researchers have encountered more challenges in publishing in the main marketing journals, because of they lack managerial implications, but this is changing rapidly.

Transformative Consumer Research: A New Paradigm in Marketing Academia

I believe this is a good time in history to stop and look at ourselves as academics – are you a Wal-Mart, a Whole Foods, or a CSA? As a Wal-Mart you have a lot to be proud of in terms of the sophistication and skills acquired to carry out research efficiently. But can these be used effectively to create the world we want without changing our inner worlds? As a CSA, your inner worlds are in complete alignment with the vision of a new equitable world, but alone it is hard to make a difference at the level we want. As a Whole Food you can only push your boundaries so far in doing research that is meaningful but in niche areas that cannot change the world at large. Each one of these groups has unique strengths and limitations.

What is needed is a new paradigm that combines the strengths of each group and this is possible through innovative thinking and a new mindset. A good example in the real world is that of Equal Exchange which has revolutionized the way coffee is traded. It has demonstrated through effective partnerships with farmer cooperatives that business can be profitable, equitable, and sustainable. The TCR initiative is a step in the right direction in that it has brought together the Wal-Marts, the Whole Foods, and the CSA’s to collaborate in ways that were not imagined earlier. Through dialog, common ground was shaped to take the first steps in using research skills and strengths of each group to move forward together towards a more equitable world for all.

My vision of transformative consumer research involves effective collaborations of diverse groups of researchers and non-researchers who are inspired to change the world. Such collaborative work will change the world through innovative research, education to spark wisdom and not mere knowledge (Also see David Mick), and effective implementation of the research in the real world. The new paradigm will be defined by passion, purpose, transparency, and innovation.

What is your vision of transformative consumer research?

Please take a few seconds to answer the poll questions who are you today and who would you like to be in the future. A quick reminder, Wal-Marts are those aspiring high turnover in good journals and not interested in impact; Whole Foods aspire a balance between turnover and meaningful research; CSAs have impact on society and meaningful research as the highest priority.
The poll can be found on the right side of the page when you scroll up to the title.