FBlog

Branding

Innovating? Beware of crowd-washing.

by Tom Adams on Jul 7, 2010

crowdwashingNews that unexpected public demand for ‘Your Freedom’ – the UK government policy crowd-sourcing initiative – crashed the idea-gathering website last week is an indication of a surge in popularity for digital participation. The site, which asks citizens to submit and rank suggestions for the repeal of ‘oppressive laws’, will provide inputs for a new freedom bill from the UK coalition government this year. Crowd-sourcing, or harnessing the wisdom of crowds to solve problems and generate ideas, has replaced ‘social media monitoring’ as the most searched, least understood marketing buzz term. And governments and brands alike are starting to experiment with the power of crowd intelligence.

The site claims that over 2,200 ideas were submitted on the first day alone, with over 18,000 votes and 7,419 comments. Some of these ideas were more controversial than others – including a repeal of death penalty laws and those forbidding humans marrying horses. Nick Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister and figurehead of the initiative is reported to have said that Your Freedom is designed as a “…raucous initiative the government was not supposed to control.”

But the markers of crowd-sourcing success, for government and business, are not the volume of ideas you are able to generate, or even their quality. The single most important rule is to act on the ideas created and filtered by your crowd. Being guided by voters is, of course, a principle driving parliamentary democracy, although it remains to be seen how far the coalition implements ideas that people vote for (particularly if they conflict with policy or good taste). Businesses on the other hand, are not constitutionally or operationally guided by democratic principles. So the risk of ‘crowd-washing’, or asking for ideas to look good, rather than actually change strategy or innovate around customer thinking, is even greater for corporations and brands.

Some businesses are already relatively mature in their use of crowd-sourcing techniques and make a point of highlighting the number of ideas they have implemented from their crowds, not just how many were submitted. Importantly, Best Buy Idea Exchange, MyStarbucksIdea and Dell IdeaStorm all reveal how many ideas have been used by the business.

And this leads to a broader point about the use of crowds for innovation, or any strategic engagement with stakeholders. If you’re going to tap the wisdom of crowds, make sure this kind of openness is consistent with your values, you have executive sponsorship to implement the ideas generated, you manage the expectations of your crowd accordingly and consider the reputation impact of doing nothing at the end. Just like good management, if you’re going to ask the opinion of your team, make sure you are open to changing your mind. If not, don’t ask.

Tags:               

Join the Discussion

  • Tweets that mention Innovating? Beware of crowd-washing. » FBlog -- Topsy.com - Jul 26, 2010

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Guntis Stirna, Mārtiņš Kaļva. Mārtiņš Kaļva said: RT @StirnaGun: Prasot tautas (patērētaja) viedokli jābūt gatavam arī to ievērot. http://ow.ly/2g2TX #in [...]

  • Mike Williams - Jul 30, 2010

    A great post, and so very true! In one of my first jobs, I asked my manager why we didn’t have a suggestion box. His reply was that there were too many items already on his list for fixing, and therefore we shouldn’t ask customers for their lists if we aren’t ready to act on them. An early lesson, and a good one.

    Too many organizations are getting on the crowd-sourcing bandwagon when they realize the opportunity – but don’t understand the responsibility or risk – of asking users for their thoughts, time and energy. Crowds never give their input away for free; sometimes input is purchased, sometimes it is invested toward possible reward, and sometimes it is entrusted. (And when it is entrusted, it provides the most risk and reward to an organization: brand loyalists who are motivated to grant their input to a brand typically generate the richest insights, but the process and interactions tend to polarize one’s connection to a brand, by either significantly deepening their own perceived connection to the brand or eroding their trust and how they perceive their value to the brand.)

  • Marc - Sep 1, 2010

    I like the concept of rewarding people for constructive feedback and efforts. If anything comes from an idea those involved should be openly rewarded. If someone put in the time to produce something that is later used this should be rewarded too.

    Most consumers have ideas as to “what would be nice to have” or better with company products, but don’t have the knowledge, funds and/or time to implement. They have a wish as to how a companies product should be. So, what would happen if every company would reward people for their ideas and efforts?

    Getting more people to share their thoughts and POV is a good thing.

FutureBrand is part of McCann Worldgroup, the official marketing services provider for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

www.interpublic.com