MBA 734 - Prediction Markets

Is it a good idea to encourage ALL employees to trade in these markets? Should insiders and/or highly uninformed people be allowed to trade? Do they help or hurt the market?

I think the decision on whether or not to encourage all employees to participate depends on how invested you would want the employees to be in the project. On the positive side, should you have all employees involved, the information gleaned from the GPM is likely to be a bit more accurate as often the case when more traders are involved. Second, because many employees have a genuine interest in the markets within GPM it is possible those employees make want to work harder to ensure a certain product meets a release date. This however means you have people exceptionally close to the market involved which may not be exactly what you want.

When it comes to insiders and the uninformed, its quite possible that the information that those users are adding to the system will either be biased or somewhat useless. When users have either an "all or nothing" attitude towards a particular market within GPM the end result of information from that market may not ring true. Again, things all depend on what one wants to get out of GPM. If GPM is the main interest, then the more users the better but the hope is they fall somewhere in the middle in terms of knowledge and closeness with respect to the issue. If GPM is just a way to get users interested and motivated in the well-being of a project with which they are associated, the more users the better, particularly those that are closely involved.

Move over MingleStick

Poor MingleStick. Not only was the e-business card product a shaky idea at best, it appears to have competition. The kicker? The competition is integrated with the iPhone and yes, there is "an app for that".

Check it out here : http://i.gizmodo.com/5214855/e-launches-brings-you-easy-virtual-and-physical-business-card-sharing

RIP MingleStick

MBA 734 - Threadless

In what other industries or areas would Threadless’ community-driven product development model work well? And not so well?

It seems that in order for the idea behind Threadless to translate to other industries, the end product would have to be relatively in expensive. The risk associated with producing any given shirt for Threadless is relatively low, especially considering they have already been able to gauge the popularity of the product before it is even made and have determined demand is likely sufficient. I wouldn't expect a car manufacturer to allow individuals to submit designs or build prototypes and then turn around and produce the car. The cost in terms of time and money is just too great for both the user and the company.

In addition to being less expensive, the end product should likely be something that translates to the community format. One of the great things that makes Threadless popular is the fact that anyone can participate and submit designs. The ability to assist in the creation of the product has to be accessible to the average individual. You wouldnt expect this idea to apply to something with a heavy manufacturing based aspect to it. To that effect, wherever you attempt to apply this model will likely be designed based and therefore more likely creative and artistic in nature.

The last criteria has to revolve around time. Whatever is being produced should really have a short lead time. When using the community to gauge interest in the product, time is crucial. If you are unable to get the product out to consumers while it is still fresh in their minds, the interest in purchasing the product is likely to wain.

MBA 734 - LinkedIn

Online social networks have become ubiquitous in the past few years. What forms of value do users get from these services and who is most likely to sign up on LinkedIn versus other sites?

At the root of every social network is the social interaction. Whether its MySpace, Facebook or LinkedIn, social networks allow individuals to stay in contact and share more information than ever before. Of the major social networks, MySpace and Facebook seem to focus more on the "social" part of social networking, while LinkedIn seems to dedicate itself more to networking in its more literal form. From the more socially focused networks, users are now able to stay in contact with current friends or acquaintances almost 24 hours per day and are given the ability to share almost any sort of information about themselves they wish. In addition to keeping up with current people within their social network, users can expand that network to include people they met long ago or have never met at all. Sites like MySpace and Facebook provide value to users in that they allow people to share experiences about themselves and connect with others. Although the more socially focused websites certainly have true networking aspects to them, in my experiences its the social aspect that really drives activity.

When the user is more interested in networking and making contact with individuals for that purpose, LinkedIn seems to be the place to go. In many ways the concept of LinkedIn is not too far off from other social networking sites. You have a profile, share some information about yourself and you can connect to other users, thus creating your network. Where LinkedIn certainly differs is that the main focus of the information that is being shared is all geared towards business. Where did you go to school? Where have you worked? What are your skills? And so on. If this is what you are interested then LinkedIn is the place for you. In my experience, many people are part of more than one social network. MySpace and Facebook often meet their social needs, while LinkedIn is there for professional needs.

Whether you are using a social networking site for social or professional reasons, beware the "serial networkers". Whether its the desire to feel connected to as many people as possible or the thought that the more connections the better, everyone knows somebody that attempts to make connections with other users simply to make connections. Whether its the guy with 10,000 friends on MySpace or the lady that's "linked" to 4300 people, serial networkers dilute the potent affects of the social network. My guess is that most people genuinely want to stay connected to a select group of people and don't mind sharing information with those people. However, as users networks continue to grow and begin to include individuals they don't truly intend to interact with, the more convoluted the networks become. All this has the potential to lead to network erosion as users leave a network because they feel the value has diminished.

MBA 734 - Wikipedia

How do Wikipedia's processes for creating and modifying articles ever lead to high-quality results?

Wikipedia seems to rely heavily on the desire of the average person to easily obtain factual or reference like information. It goes without saying that when someone looks for information on the internet, they hope that information is accurate and appreciate sources that are known to be so. Thus, it behooves the active users of Wikipedia to create and modify content to make it as accurate as possible because the site is for everyone to use. Further if users of Wikipedia deem it to be an inaccurate source of information, they are less likely to return and certainly less likely to contribute as well. It seems that the more accurate and reputable that Wikipedia becomes, the more likely users are to contribute helpful and insightful information as oppossed to treating the site as a "junkyard". I also think that Wikipedia, in a way, leverages some of the same concepts as blogging. Many people believe individuals blog because they like to feel as though they are part of something and may eventually be seen as somewhat of an authority on a given topic. Wikipedia plays right into this, but only if the information being added by users is deemed to be on point. I find it very interesting that in just a few years Wikipedia seems to have become a legitimate source for information. At one point the idea that anyone could edit or add content made many feel that the site was useless to an extent, yet now it seems to be one of the first places people head when they want to know more about a topic.

MBA 734 - Blogging at DKW

Blogging in a corporate business environment certainly has advantages and disadvantages, with some of its characteristics qualifying as both. Blogging is an easy way to share information and connect with a larger market. Internal company blogging offers a good way for employees to be aware of what other employees are doing and what direction different groups within a company are heading. External blogging offers a company the ability to share a message with its consumers that is likely to be 100 percent positive and not twisted by the media. Also, the company can use the blog to drum up additional support for new products and services as a low cost alternative to paid advertising. For all the potential benefits of blogging, it can be difficult to monitor and control. With respect to internal blogging, a company would likely want to hire individuals to monitor and maintain the blogs to ensure that it was being used for the appropriate activities. Externally, the company again wants to make sure that only the messages it deems appropriate are being shared in the blogs and the information that is being shared is being done so only when the company deems it appropriate. As far as which companies might be a good fit for blogging, I dont think there is any one kind of company that would benefit more than another, but rather its particular departments within many companies that would likely benefit. I would expect that technology and product development departments, as well as public relations departments would have the most to gain by blogging. Essentially, any company or company department that has a message that they would like to share with the public can use blogging.

MBA 734 - iPhone and Digital Music

Has the digital music market irreversibly tipped in Apple’s favor?

As we have discussed previously, Apple isnt the only game in town when it comes to digital music but they certainly are the leader. The adaptation of the iPod and now the iPhone certainly has given Apple an edge. If the tecnology trend continues where consumers look to have an all-in-one device, it is likely that Apple's share of the market will continue to grow. To date there have been no real competitors to the iPhone. Of all of the similar devices, none seem to have been able to deliver to consumers what the iPhone has. Further, Apple has been able to leverage the sucess of the ipod and iTunes in marketing the iPhone. When you look at the edge that Apple has with respect to iTunes and iPod and now with the emergence of the iPhone, it does seem that the balance of power in the digital music market has tipped in Apple's favor and it will likely take more than one competitor to tilt the scales out of Apple's favor.