In filmmaking there is a term known as “shooting ratio” that refers to the ratio between the amount of footage shot and the amount of footage contained in the final cut. What drives this ratio are the number of shots planned for each scene for maximum coverage and the number of takes allocated per shot.
As a former filmmaker turned strategy consultant, I have been thinking about the value that could be derived from taking a similar approach to strategy development and execution, in terms of an organization’s innovation efforts.
On a shot-by-shot basis, a filmmaker will decide how many takes (a.k.a. attempts or permitted failures) that will be required or anticipated. This is planned ahead so it can be incorporated into the budget. With every additional take, another option becomes available. Many factors can influence the outcome of a film; having options helps to increase the likelihood of a better end-product.
This approach can be applied beyond filmmaking; it does not necessarily have to be restricted to a process where the outcome is a tangible product or thing. It can also apply to service innovation where the outcome is a new experience.
If you ask an Oscar-nominated or winning actor which “take” (1, 2 or 12) it was that ended up being the clip that led to their being considered, you will receive different answers. Some hit the mark within the first one or two takes. Others work their way up incrementally, building to the point where they hit the mark, and, finally, others use each take to try something entirely different in the hopes that at least one will be usable.
This idea is very similar to current trends like rapid prototyping and agile programming with technology, and innovation development where incremental improvements are made through constant iterations and refinements. “Let’s do it again, only different, better, slower, faster.” Teams sprint between milestones rather than run a marathon only to end up at the finish line with an unwanted outcome. By pursuing short-term objectives through “sprints” and reflecting on those achievements once they’ve been reached, organizations can revise their approach and move forward on a new trajectory with a different and likely more highly anticipated outcome.
To some, these activities seem inefficient, bordering on wasteful; but if the outcome met or exceeded expectations, was it still the wrong approach? Designing and budgeting failure into the process is not an innovation indulgence — it’s a hedge or mitigation against failure or a less desirable outcome.
Malcolm Gladwell talks about the concept of 10,000 hours being the amount of time required for someone to develop and hone a skill before becoming an expert. Those 10,000 hours were filled with numerous attempts and failures but, in the end, expertise was the result.
Ultimately, I am suggesting that people, and organizations in a broader sense, be given the opportunity to try a variety of different things and honour their failures in the process, because that is where the greatest learning and potential for successful innovation comes from. However, I am not suggesting that people be allowed to make an unlimited number of attempts either.
I am just asking you to imagine that if Take 6 was the right or best one but you or your organization weren’t allowed to make six attempts at anything, then what a missed opportunity that would be.
Tweet This Post
The project I am currently working on — a strategic planning project incorporating the Balanced Scorecard developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton — got me thinking about how one might apply the Scorecard to social media strategies. I know that I am not the first to consider such an approach, but I still thought it might be worthwhile to give you my take on it.
Historically, strategies have been predominantly measured on the financial impact that they brought about. The Balanced Scorecard was developed to provide a more holistic approach to devising strategic objectives for an organization and measuring the outcomes.
The Scorecard is composed of four perspectives:
- People (a.k.a. Learning) – Develop Workforce
- Internal – Enhance Operational Efficiencies
- Customers – Grow Market Share Or Share of Wallet
- Financial – Improve Profitability
The intent is to determine a few key objectives for each perspective and how their success will be measured.
When an organization is considering its social media strategy, a Balanced Scorecard might look like this:
- People – Develop the social media capability of the workforce
- Internal – Embed social media within operations where possible and appropriate
- Customers – Layer social media onto existing marketing activities
- Financial – Lower cost of marketing and customer engagement
Some of the staff might already be social media savvy but the capability of others might need to be developed. Social media capabilities and enthusiasm will run the gamut from non-existent to possibly over-sharing. Regardless, elevating an organization’s overall social media aptitude and disposition will only serve to benefit it. From recruitment and marketing to customer engagement, a social media capability is becoming and shall remain an organizational necessity.
From wikis for collaboration and information sharing to CEO’s who tweet, social media can and should become part of an organization’s operational DNA. Granted it may not be possible and/or appropriate in every case but companies are changing how they create and share information as part of their collaborative efforts. In some ways, social media can be credited for making the walls between business units or silos and management layers more porous and less of an obstacle standing in the way of solving problems and making progress.
As I have suggested in previous posts, social media is not meant to replace your historical marketing efforts; Social media is meant to complement and extend what you are already doing. Numerous examples such as One Million Acts of Green take the holistic approach and integrate social media into their overall marketing strategy. Customers have not migrated completely from all other media to social media alone, so reaching them will still require a comprehensive and multi-faceted approach. Tweeting alone just will not do it. This new approach will also raise the potential for higher quality customer interaction with the prospect of converting customers to fans and, ultimately (and hopefully), into advocates.
Given the economic climate, companies have to do more with less yet still be able to reach an audience that becomes more fractured and elusive every day. If used properly and effectively, social media enables global reach but with an air of customer intimacy not easily attained through other more conventional or historical marketing means. Who wouldn’t want to nurture richer, more profitable customer relationships at a lower cost? I should repeat one caveat: the cost might be lower in terms of dollars spent on ad buys, technical tools, and/or print but there is still a cost associated with the time and effort that have to be applied.
Those are the four areas of the Balanced Scorecard for Social Media as I see them. You may agree or disagree. I am simply suggesting that if an organization takes a Balanced Scorecard approach to social media, determines key objects for each of the four perspectives, and commits to track progress against those objectives, it will most likely end up in a better position. The key for success, however, requires that the organization — as with all Balanced Scorecard and strategic planning initiatives — own it and see it as an ongoing activity rather than a single event.
Is such ownership possible? I hope so.
Tweet This Post
Over the last few years I have enjoyed numerous benefits from using social media tools and platforms such as Twitter, Ning and LinkedIn. I have been able to make connections locally and internationally that have helped me and where I have been able to reciprocate.
Connections have been able to learn more about my expertise and that of my consulting company as well as how we might collaborate. It has been an enriching experience. I have been fortunate to be a contributor to and collaborator with a number of groups and communities such as Hubba Social Media Consultants (or via LinkedIn), the Business Model Hub and the Community Marketing Blog (CMB).
The Hubba Group hosts the Game Changing Podcast every Monday night with thought leaders such as Doc Searls, co-author of the Cluetrain Manifesto and brings together social media experts to share insights, resources and best practices.
I have blogged previously about the Business Model Hub, the resulting book the Business Model Generation and the conference in Amsterdam this past June. Momentum has continued and local gatherings are being held around the world with Toronto’s gathering of business model innovation practitioners meeting later this month (#bmgenTO).
The CMB is growing and invites people interested in joining to participate in Blog Off II. I have enjoyed being a regular contributor to the Community Marketing Blog and the interaction with the other contributors. I have learned a great deal from everyone involved and highly recommend entering the Blog Off. As a member of the panel, I am really looking forward to the submissions from all of the participants.
These are just a few examples of how being open to connect and collaborate has paid tremendous dividends for my company and for me. Could the same happen for you? I have some other collaborations brewing that I will talk about more in the near future but suffice it to say that they would not be happening if not for social media and an openness to connect.
Tweet This Post
