Herd - the hidden truth about who we are

It's true, I do

When I travel it always takes a while to digest things I've seen or done.

So a couple of weeks on, my NYC trip's composting nicely. What it all means is slowly becoming clear to me - more as it does, I promise.

Meanwhile, here's me (and Scott) talking at the ARF about how stuff spreads and what to do about it from a research p.o.v. Think - despite nerves - that it worked OK in the end (NB the fella sitting behind me is Duncan Watts - top fella btw). Thanks to ARF for the invite...

Caught up with a bunch of lovely folk while I was in town - Faris, Koops, Tash, Duncan and (the Other) Anomaly folk, Noah, Paul and the guys at Naked NYC, Bob, Barbara, John and Susan and the Brainjuicer gang and of course my old chum Domenico. And London friends Nicky and Hugo and their brood out of town...

The only comrades I missed out on were Brian Collins who's got a new funky business down in Soho and Mark Wnek who was off having an op. Next time

I know it's silly but just walking the streets made me happy

I heart...

A doctor writes: why most of the Brainy stuff is nonsense

Hat tip to Sair.

Great piece in the Times on why claims made for the application of neuroscience to literature are more than a bit premature and at best foolish.

Anyone thinking of using scanning or EEGs or some other tool from the labs, please note.

You're looking in the wrong place, through the wrong lens and mistaking a white coat for insight. Not least because we are - at heart - HERD creatures and not isolated and independent biocomputers.

"For the extraordinary thing about human beings – and what captures what is human – is that they transcend their bodies; that human experience is not solitary sentience but has a public face; it belongs to a community of minds"

Now, let's not have any more of this nonsense, please

Thank you for your attention

A year on...

It's a year since the Virginia Tech shooting.

Interesting to see how attempts to prevent another incident are based in individualist thinking: identifying and removing pathological individuals...

...as opposed to working out a plan how to stop the copycat effect which seems to be behind its spread

Anti-design design

Amid all the excitement recently about design being the new black (unfair, I know given that I agree with what Paul's saying and have actually worked with the Collinsmeister and know how good he really is!), I've got to say I loved my visit to this store in Norwalk Connecticut 10 days ago. Me and Arthur (3) and Ben (1+) (and their parents, too).

Animatronic fruit and veg, theatrical displays, loads to wow and ahh at. In fact a veritable emporium of social objects: lots to interact around both in the store and after. And all of it in appalling "taste".

A far cry from the loneliness of aisle 17 of Sainsburytescomorrisonsasdaland, indeed. Brilliant!

Course, Paul's still on the money about design...

Making you an offer you can't refuse...

Image c/o Businessweek

I don't know if you spotted this piece last week on what Managers can learn from the Mafia (and no it's not kill everybody who disrespects you or gets in your way....)

The book is now on order. Sounds more interesting than "My Brilliant Career" vol 328, doesn't it?

UPDATE but not as good as this...

Asking me what I want

Pic c/o Timesonline

Hat tip to Paul: Sen McCain has used Linked-In to ask American citizens what they think he should do if he gets to take over in the White House. The answers make quite interesting reading BUT the interesting thing is the fact he asked at all.

While it might play in some quarters to suggest 'customer-orientation' (and in contrast in others to suggest weakness and lack of principle, I'm sure), but it'd be interesting to see what might happen if - following James and John who recognise that humans are better at each other than at themselves - he asked the rest of us...

Just a thought. But one that won't be taken up, I'm sure

Ola Ola Ola

Great idea from my lovely chums at Albion:

A virtual Mexican wave (or "ola" as they call they call it, down Mexico way and rather more blandly, "THE Wave" in North America...;-))

The offline original thing is a great example of a number of bigger issues:

i. how much we enjoy doing stuff (like this) together
ii. how easy we find it to co-ordinate our actions are this
iii. how threatening the "grown-ups" find it when we do stuff together (stadium authorities around the world repeatedly try to ban it)

Now, as you've been good, dear Reader, today's free gift is this link to Dirk Helbing's brilliant research team who study and model Mexican Waves around the world. The maths show that it really is a case of we do what we do because of what those around us are doing...

Enjoy! And join in, why don't you...everyone around you is!

Admen and Madmen

Rory has a nice piece in this week's Spectator: typically and admirably contrarian he argues that it's a good thing that Admen have got to the heart of government (and not just in the UK). His hook is the drama series Mad Men (currently enhancing our Sunday evenings in the UK - yes, I know US-based readers: you've already seen all of Series 1. We're all done with Torchwood and you're just discovering the joys of the Doctor).

Much as I love Rory, I have to disagree.

Not as Grant does here in his review of the TV series where he points out that

"ad men pra(e?)yed upon culture and consumers"

...though - were it true - this isn't a very nice thought.

No, my disagreement is on the basis that (M)Admen from the Saatchi's onwards have helped reinforce some really silly notions about human beings and human behaviour that politicians and civil servants work from, while maintaining the illusion that we (ministers, management, marketing) and our tools (such as adverts) are a strong force influencing consumer behaviour: that they make much difference.

So whatever your politics, wouldn't it be better if our chosen leaders had a better map of mass behaviour and a more realistic view of what can be done in order to develop better policies and implement them well.

But before you get the wrong impression, David and Stephen are much more than admen: both have proven themselves as managers and leaders; both are much smarter than anyone in Mad Men. And both will do far more in no.10 than any mere (M)Adman could. I'd want them both on my team.

Who owns your football club?

Lots of silliness at LFC at the moment, which fans of other clubs can't help but feel ambivalent about.

On the one hand, tribal loyalties make the long, slow pressing of the self-destruct button morbidly fascinating viewing.

On the other, it makes me ask myself who these "businessmen" squabbling about a football club are and what they think they're doing.

Ok, so they may have bought the assets/debts of this "club" on the basis of some hopeful projection of future revenue flows concocted by folk who really wanted the cash injection needed to match the likes of United and some of them like the idea of being the great Saviour/Patron BUT the club is really owned by the fans.

Without the fans' adoring and forgiving loyalty to the football club (and each other), then the assets are worth little more than the property and IP portfolio.

Without the fans, there's bugger all.

Without the fans and their interaction with each other, there's Sweet FA to squabble over.

The Great Bullmore once wrote that "People build brands as birds build nests, from scraps and straws we chance upon." (That's the People, out there not you marketers).

The best a marketer can do is host, facilitate and encourage them to collaborate to build brands (and "brand value") with each other. The better you get at doing this, the greater the value of the assets you have in the bank.

But don't ever forget where they come from...

Back to NYC

pic Artist rendering: Olafur Eliasson- Courtesy Public Art Fund/Handout/Reuters

Had a really crazy time here in NYC and now - in the last few hours before I catch my plane home - am wide awake from the overstimulation.

Thanks to Gareth, Jason and Merry for this Herd piece which highlights one of the things i've been saying most frequently to folk here: it's damn hard to shape mass behaviour and almost impossible to predict the effects of your attempts with any precision. Doesn't mean that HERD is wrong or less useful than other models; quite the opposite. That said, we'd all prefer to pretend that mass behaviour is easy to shape and mould, wouldn't we?

Thanks also to everyone here for the fun and stimulation - you know who you are.

It just seems that we're gaining traction here. Folk are picking up the HERD thing and running with it.

But even if we're not (and my mind is playing tricks on me to make it seem like we are), I've just got to be back here in the Summer to see what Eliasson makes of the Brooklyn Bridge. I adored his Tate Modern installation

More thoughts from the other side - from Dear Old Blighty.