What trends might Smart People Magazine care about, tap into or encourage?

I had started a trend list in the wiki and Boris suggested I move it here. Here it is with some additions. I've stripped the formatting assuming it won't hold.

Aging Population in the Western World
- the fact that many people recognize the importance of knowledge in new ways when they are well into their careers
- the need to connect people across generations (web 2.0 meets KM; retirees meet new recruits; teens become activists because of inherited issues...)

The Erosion of Boundaries
- cultures blending; disciplines blending, hopefully scholarly work and practice informing each other...
increasing importance of work across boundaries
- stories needed to inspire and guild cross-boundary work

Technology Trends
- what are smart people doing in relation to these? http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp

And these consumer trends from Trendwatching (quotes from trendwatching.com):

- Nichetributes: low-cost, practical tributes to the zeitgeist, which is about the power of making products and services relevant by incorporating ‘attributes’ and features that cater to distinct (if not niche) consumer lifestyles and situations.

- Luxyoury: What will define luxury over the next few years? The answer to a large degree is, ‘luxury will be whatever you want it to be’. After all, what constitutes luxury is closely related to what constitutes scarcity...

- Feedback 3.0: will be all about companies joining the conversation, if only to get their side of the story in front of the mass audience that now scans reviews. Expect smart companies to be increasingly able (and to increasingly demand) to post their apologies and solutions, preferably directly alongside reviews from unhappy customers. Expect the same for candid rebuttals by companies who feel (and can prove) that a particular review is unfair or inaccurate, and want to share their side of the story.

- Econcierges are firms and services dedicated to helping households go green in any possible way.

- Mapmania: Geography is about everything that is (literally) close to consumers, and it's a universally familiar method of organizing, finding and tracking relevant information on objects, events and people. And now that superior geographical information is accessible on-the-go, from in-car navigation to iPhones, the sky is the limit.

- Happy Ending: the most important side effect of more austere times is probably that consumers start questioning what truly makes them happy, which more often than not steers them towards the realization that happiness ain’t (just) about traditional consumption.

Hi Alice.

I guess I must have missed this knowledgeable and thoughtful post while clumsily experimenting with the Wiki.

Alice, these are powerful topic areas Smart People should explore/investigate and include reports in the first edition. And, they are all more than topical -- they are timely, especially your last observations about the use of consumer knowledge to decide what is really important to one's sense of well-being.

I've copied and pasted your post into my SP content file as a reminder to pursue these ideas as possible stories. If you have any source recommendations, please let me know and also I'd love to have you as a writer/reporter on one of them.

The first issue, by the way, is critical. We may get better in subsequent issues, but it will be too late if we don't 'knock 'em dead' straight out of the starting gate. That will be the 'product' our marketing friends will have in hand to sell.

Hi Alice.

Whoops! In my first reply I jumped ahead to developing magazine content instead of focusing on the business at hand -- the business plan.

Of course, your Topics are excellent justifications for the need of a magazine like Smart People. You've done a much better job than I of expressing the broader trends that are at work in the social and business sectors.

How much proof of these trends do you think we need for the Business Plan?

And another thing your insights bring to mind is the typical Editorial Board for publications. Inside Knowledge magazine has one, but they are quite inactive. I'm sure they were recruited to serve on the board as strategic Icons, not for input on editorial content.

But, maybe we need to include an Editorial Board in the business plan and then populate it with people who are on top of trends among some of the key constituencies SP will serve -- such as HR (David Ulrich). In that case you get both Icon and input, but the primary criterion for an Editorial board member should be input.

And, that raises another question -- should we work up a list of key constituences?

As always, Alice, I thank you for your knowledge, thoughts and energy.

Jerry

What an excellent list. I like this way of approaching the magazine. Trends signify movement, and the readership would certainly be interested in reading about these. Another focus could be on weak signals which are possible indicators of trends to come and dabble in futurology. In fact Smart People would be those that understand how to detect weak signals and track trends and make sense out of them. There could be a tools column which focuses on how to make this practical for people (and organizations) to do. These could be software tools as well as Mind-level tools/techniques that allow for personal knowledge management, brainstorming, research, analysis, and facilitation.

Another comment I have is that Smart People as a title seems targeted at HR folks more than others. if we wanted to have a wider audience, perhaps using the word "Trend" or "Future" in the title could target a larger audience,

Thanks, Raj, for joining us and getting right down to business.

I too am excited about the trends pov that Alice has brought to light which goes far beyond my original justification for focusing on the people end of KM -- which was that there is a trend of migration in KM from the core, corporate level emphasis to the business units and professions. When KM gets there, I'm afraid the folks on whom KM will depend are not aware enough to take up the reins.

As hard as we've tried at the corporate level over the past 20 years (I know you'll find this hard to believe, Raj:-) we've not gotten the kind of buy-in or understanding we really want where the rubber meets the road.

We've assumed the problem is cultural -- that people resist because they aren't willing to share. But on the other hand, people are flocking to the open sharing models in Web 2.0 and celebrating the joy of sharing!

My original thought surrounding SP was that KM should get on board the social networking craze and ride it to victory. But I wasn't thinking beyond that, and there's where Alice has opened my mind. I think we need to do a lot more researching and thinking about this greater dimension and work a summary of it into the business plan. How about everyone else?

edited on 04/12/2008 by Jerry Ash

Also, Raj, your thoughts about the magazine title leaning toward human resources is something that hadn't occurred to me. If that is a general impression, then it will work against my broader vision of SP as a magazine that will have value for people at home, work or play. The strategy in that is to snare the readers on knowledge in action in personal matters and then connect that to the opportunities they have in enterprise.

"Play" means basic social networking. "Home" means using the search capabilities of the Net to learn what the side effects are of a drug the Doc ordered, or which SUV gets the best gas mileage. The theory being that as people (particularly Gen X, Y and Millennium) acquire the habit of thinking independently at home, they'll want to work the same way at work.

BTW, I've engaged Robert Wendover, generational expert, to "talk to" readers about their likely frustrations around that very subject.

PS: To the marketing brains among us, isn't one of the jobs of marketing to define the meaning in a name? Take a name like "Google". Who would have guessed anyone would take that seriously? :-)

Hi Jerry,

I maybe a bit biased (or conditioned) to equate "People" with HR since MindTree's HR function is called People Function.

Regarding Google, I think that yes, one can build a brand like that especially if it brings in a flair of counterculture which becomes almost hip to be associated with. Same would apply to twitter and tweeting. Or the hiphop and bling culture and speak. I think that the digital generation and the techies that enabled it have created a counterculture and so such terms are acceptable today as brands. Just MHO, thought I am no expert in either anthropology or marketing.

Overall though, I think it would be useful to see what audience you're targeting and choose an appropriate name (and that maybe SP.)

And yes, I think the social networking angle is important -- and as far as I am concerned it is center stage in KM which is about making connections (taking a connectivist view.) And from an intellectual capital perspective it also makes sense.

But I suspect that your target audience maybe more than just KM or HR professionals. If you bring in the Trends angle, then it is open to Technologists, Strategists, enterpreneus, innovators, to name a few. It could be something like Wired but with a focus on the knowledge business. And this would do KM professionals good to think more strategically about KM, taking a longer view of time, and going beyond information and content management which is too often the trap they fall into.

All good thoughts, Raj. And thanks for mentioning Wired. I need to add that to our "competitor" list.

Jerry -

Wow. Love the work so far on the business plan and how Smart People is taking shape.

As for the publication, Alice has provided an incredible start and may I suggest that you blend that with your idea to appeal to people who are smart in their business activities, home activities and play activities.

From there, let the smart people who read the publication help to guide it forward with some guest submissions and open articles (some?...all?) to allow for a blog-type social dialog. This can keep the collaboration alive and make smart people a living publication of sorts for smart people, and by observing participation give some guidance to future subjects or areas to focus on.

Regarding the name, I'm kind of partial to Smart People as it is a constant reminder that the publication is about the people who are knowledgeable, innovative and smart....not the technology. Not to take anything away from Raj's input, which is insightful, but to offer an opinion on the name...to me entering in the idea of "trends" (in to the name of the publication) starts to give too much of a perception of having a technology bent. Articles of course would cover various work, play, and home trends as people demonstrate their smarts.

OK, I had to break in my collaboration gently, but I'm in.

And I now see that the name discussion is within another forum...OK...give me a day...I catch up to everyone!

edited on 06/12/2008 by Tom Godfrey

Both/And
Raj--you wrote:
...
And yes, I think the social networking angle is important -- and as far as I am concerned it is center stage in KM which is about making connections (taking a connectivist view.) And from an intellectual capital perspective it also makes sense.

But I suspect that your target audience maybe more than just KM or HR professionals. If you bring in the Trends angle, ...


When we are talking about inter/multi/trans-disciplinary work (which is a trend in itself) I think it is practical to include all of these areas of focus (KM, HR, social networking, innovation...) without becoming too diffuse. Perhaps the niche has to do with the intersections of these things. Perhaps we end up with a list (a fictitious one is created below for illustration) where stories we love must fit with all or almost all of the criteria.
* people focused
* about changing something for the better: innovation or potential innovation (weak signal fit?)
* spanning boundaries or bringing unlikely ideas/people/groups/disciplines/cultures together
* fitting with an important trend
* practice-focused or practical: readers can imagine doing something related
* intellectually stimulating with [subtle] links to research, theories, thought leadership
* related to knowledge work/knowledge economy/wisdom

edited on 07/12/2008 by Alice MacGillivray