Is "Conversation" Overused?

I think it might be, especially by marketers as everyone is trying to find the next right answer to growing a business. And maybe doing so without spending too much time on the actual business plan. I'll pick that one apart another time. The issue, as I see it, is that the term "conversation" is being misused -- or misunderstood.

After dinner with Geoff, C.C. Chapman, and Doug Meacham last night, we shot an impromptu video while we each replied to the question -- do you think that the term "conversation" is getting overused? Has it lost some of its meaning?

This morning I am speaking about The Age of Conversation with members of the Direct Marketing Association of Washington, D.C. -- the topic, not the book, although I am planning to raffle off one paperback copy of the book to illustrate what it feels like to receive something unexpected, for free. The discovery made over time -- and the value the book will acquire -- will be learning about the opinions and thought process of 103 marketers and writers.  That is very much what it feels like to learn about blogging.

Back when the French fries became "freedom fries" because of disagreements on intervention in Iraq, I worked for a French company. Citizens being patriotic especially in the agricultural world, many of our customers shared publicly that they intended to boycott our products, even though our affiliation with the French parent was two-degrees removed and we employed mostly US citizens. An argument that is born around emotional issues cannot be helped with rational reasoning -- it needs an open dialogue.

So that is exactly what we did in response. Our CEO called each of our customers and had a very candid and open talk about their concerns -- listening and addressing each one with them. While the ultimate goal was to remain a viable company, the purpose of the call was to address our customers' issues.  That was an example of approaching business with an attitude of transparency and honesty. That is the attitude of social media.

Why use social media? If you look through my very cryptic deck, while most organizations still see themselves talking though an org chart, that never existed -- it is the remnant of an era since gone by where command and control got the job done. Now even the military thinks more about leadership than many of our businesses. And where is the customer according to that? Way out there is outer space.

Guess what, people self organize around networks and the dynamics of work look more like the following image with clusters of influencers, connectors and their niche groups, to which your customers belong. People get things done without the chart. So while it's important to acquire academic and theoretic knowledge (that is the Accademia di Modena, the Italian West Point), in a one to many format like this one (that is if the audience has not jumped in here yet); it is here (small street in Modena) that we learn about the stuff people do, by talking with each other. Yes, that was after we won the World Cup.

What are these magic concepts that make a difference in this brave new world? Maybe there used to be a core group of people inside a company, then the customers outside. I think today we have three layers -- the company/entity with its rules and processes, the employees with their skills and stories and the customers. More and more as employees are exposed to social media at home and in their personal circles and networks, they feel less and less associated with their organization. So the entity that does not open up runs the risk of having to make itself relevant to two groups -- one is internal, one is external. It depends on both for its survival.

Get out there and talk with your customers (Jeff Bezos, Amazon), be open with other entities and governments (David Filo, Yahoo with a delegation from Singapore). Is your business model market-driven?

Direct marketing is an approach -- the one to one business development model with the intent to elicit a response, translate in % of sales and lifetime value. No matter what people are doing online, they are spending more and more time there -- and they might be your customers/prospects doing it as well.

Do you have a blog? I know the VP of Communications and Campbell's is blogging her way to 50 -- what a great way to try the tool, figure out how to do it and celebrate a life stage. She gets it. When you start publishing you figure out early on that unless you put your voice and personality out there, your work will read stilted, just like carefully crafted and absolutely meaningless company statements.

I'm hesitant in writing it, this is another one of those overused words -- your customers want authenticity. Pick the product manager, the product development people, someone who has the pulse on the content, the stuff that makes you who you are as a business. Most importantly, pick someone who is willing and able to talk with your customers.

Participation goes a long way to counter balance perfection. How can you align with your customers' problems? What is of value to them? What is the market doing? The meaning of communication is the response it elicits, not your intent. You are the message.

Comments

[Joe Raasch]

Hi Valeria,

Great video!

"Conversation" as word smacks of the "we need to talk" phrase in relationships. If I feel a 'conversation' coming from a business, my gut reaction is "Oh oh. They want to 'talk'...!". Not good.

I agree with your assessment. Conversation is, and should be used as, a vehicle to connect, without agendas, without any more intent than the exchange of ideas.

I hope the best-managed companies get this idea and we don't see a rash of surveys, focus groups, and "tell us what you think" buttons on website. Ugh.

There is a great new paper from W.P. Carey's Stephen Brown and Andrew Gallan and Thunderbird's Stefan Michel, to be published in the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, that proposes a new theoretical model for looking at innovation -- a model that takes into account the contributions of customers in the development of innovative products and services. (http://knowledge.wpcarey.asu.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewfeature&id=1476 )

The right approach to an engaging conversation will get clients to connect with your company. Use this with the intent of creating conversation, and you'll keep those clients.

[Mario Vellandi]

Conversation is all warm and cuddly to me, not enough cold water and objective self-importance positioning. jk

I once got to briefly speak with a principal with the Pentagram Design Group, and I asked him about effective client negotiation/presentation techniques. Funny enough he said that if you find yourself getting a lukewarm response to your presentation and there is little flow or direction from the client, then begin candidly asking what it is they're looking for, etc. It seemed to me that presentations are a waste of time unless the client is really interested. Why not shortcut the whole process with a conversation first?

[Roldano De Persio]

Hi Valeria,

great post and great video!

[Larissa Fair]

Hah - I see the still image was changed. :)

It was great to meet you today, I look forward to many more conversations - and to reading my book!

[Valeria Maltoni]

Joe -- I modified your comment slightly so people can link to the paper you reference. Yes, we don't need any more "tell us what you think" questionnaires, especially when we know that nothing will be done about our responses.

Mario -- My PPT was a guide more for me to stay on track than a process we had to go through. Being the first speaker of the day meant that I was to warm up the room and people were coming in late because of traffic, etc... lots of voices in their heads to still and bring to the present moment ;-)

Roldano -- thank you for stopping in. You now know how I spend my nights before a conference -- writing!

Larissa -- you are a fast typist, very impressive! I am really glad you got to walk away with a copy of the book. I know you will get a lot out of it. You might even decide to join the next project with us.

[Carolyn Ann]

One of the (many) benefits of getting a few years on your frame is that you can spot trends that you've seen before... "Conversation" is the mantra for e-business at the moment; when all this website "stuff" was new, "paradigm" was equally abused. Everything was a "new paradigm" - even minor, incremental, changes to work practices.

"Conversation" is not so much overused as misunderstood. It's become a bit of a convenient place to hang any available hat. The more I think about the topic, the more I continue to think that blogs, for example, aren't so much "new conversations" as simply a contemporary leaflet. Albeit one with a few bells and whistles! It's not a 'conversation', per se: that misapplies the concept of a chat to a highly specific application. There are the elements of a "conversation" in that leaflet, but less than you might find in an online forum, for example.

Hmmm. I'm going to have to think about this one a little more. The notion of blogs as leaflet has some shortcomings, but is definitely worth exploring. Of course, if anyone suddenly starts jumping about and shouting "you don't get what blogs are", etc, I'll definitely know it's a sore point. And that maybe they are so wrapped up "what's new" that they forget that conversations have been around a lot longer than the Internet... :-)

Carolyn Ann

[Lewis Green]

Valeria,

I don't think the word conversation is over-used, I think, however, that in the social media environment its lacks definition and meaning. Maybe instead of using the word less, we should spend time defining what it means within social media contect and then get businesses to buy into that meaning. I agree: It does not mean pushing information at customers in the old traditional marketing ways.

[Valeria Maltoni]

Carolyn Ann -- blogs are tools, the people writing them are people, a conversation is when people come together (Lat. cum vertere). A blog makes a hierarchy more evident -- for example, it's my blog so you are in the comments unless you guest post, etc. A forum may have a question started by someone and a moderator, and lots of peers (visually, in the tool). Leftlet is one-dimensional, the blog has breadth (topics... this one does ;-) and depth (the links, references, etc.). Makes sense?

Lewis -- people join a conversation because it means they come together, that's something you don't buy, you inspire, invite, make available. The meaning has not changed. Marketers on the other hand are trying to stick a meaning to it and sell that to businesses. Two separate issues ;-)

[Carolyn Ann]

Hmm. Not really, Valeria.

I can understand your point, but I do beg to differ. Just a little, though! :-) A conversation is when people communicate; they can gather for any reason. A political speech is not a conversation, for example: it's a bit of puffery that's not really open for conversation. Examination, criticism and questioning, yes. But conversation? Politicians would fall over flat if they had to have a conversation. (Saving the rest of us some tax dollars.)

A paper leaflet is one dimensional: it merely informs of something. A blog has some other aspects (some of which have little to do with the specific idea of a blog!), but it starts as a piece that communicates an idea (we'll assume the blogger isn't me...); later, if comments are received that discuss the content of the "principle post", then we can say that a conversation is taking place. As in right now, between you and I. (And anyone else who wants to jump in!)

So yes, you're right: a blog can contain a conversation. But it isn't necessarily all about conversing! A post with no comments is not a conversation; even if people read it, the lack of response precludes using "conversation" as a description. So, it can be argued that a blog post starts life as a leaflet, and hopefully becomes a conversation if responses are received!

On the other hand, I frequently have conversations that elicit no response. I live with a fair number of cats. :-)

Carolyn Ann

[Valeria Maltoni]

I must have left the rest of the sentence in my pen/keyboard -- coming together for the purpose of talking.

"A post with no comments is not a conversation; even if people read it, the lack of response precludes using "conversation" as a description." Bingo. A marketing program launched at consumers is not a conversation!!!

Thank you for developing the thought further, Carolyn Ann.

[Lewis Green]

Valeria,

I think you need to reconsider your rather narrow view of conversation and re-read Carolyn Ann's comment. Even before Web 2.0 entered our sphere, the American Heritage Dictionary's 3rd definition of conversation reads: "A real-time interaction with a computer." This doesn't come close to the definition you offer, which is relevant and usable but not the only possibility.

I haven't met any marketers trying to define a conversation as pushing information at customers. They may use a blog to do it. That simply demonstrates a poor use of the tool and a poor understanding of how that tool is best used. And in my comment, I specifically said: "It does not mean pushing information at customers in the old traditional marketing ways."

In the video you use to start this conversation, two of the participants offer that many of the people they know have no idea what we mean by conversation as it relates to social media. That tells me that a definition for this age needs to be developed and spread, if it is to have meaning. When I worked for a publisher, our dictionary department spent a great deal of time creating new definitions as technology changed the way we live, work and interact. This seems another instance when that may be necessary.

In conclusion, if we want to have a conversation around this idea, as your posting of the video suggests, we should be open to what commenters offer as their ideas, rather than shut us off with a narrowly-defined definiation such as, "people join a conversation because it means they come together." I can accept that as one definition, but not the only one.

[Valeria Maltoni]

Thank you for the clarification!

[deb schultz]

Valeria- as usual spot on! Sitting in a confernece - will watch video later..;)

[peter]

The press ganging of human evolutionary potential into the service of the corporation exhausts much of that potential.

Conversations become hollowed out and utilatarian - a poor copy of exchanges in the service of individual and collective humanity.

And when the utility of conversation is spent - or we have become impatient with it ( the notion that converstaion is over used ?) it will fall out of fashion.

But converstaion will continue. We will talk together until I no longer hear my own voice in your words. Perhaps that what you mean by coming together.

By the way,

"The meaning of communication is the response it elicits, not your intent. You are the message."

I'd wager this is half right. Your intent communicates something that last much longer than the message. I suspect the first converstaion is a function of the message - the fifth is a function your intent.

Like, Carolyn Ann I'd like to thank you for developing the thought a little further.

A final thought, perhaps the way we interact with blogs helps us to understand what happens in a conversation. It just slows everything down for long enough to watch yourself.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Deb -- thank you!

@Peter -- gradual like the three cups of tea concept: from guest, to acquaintance, to friend, and beyond. I LOVE your image (as always) of slowing oneself down long enough to observe what happens. Thank you so much for stopping by, it is a treat indeed to read some of your thinking. And often a wake up call as well.

[Peter]

I lied - a final thought ( what was I thinking).

For me, conversation is the practice of negotiating meaning with others and my self.

Perhaps conversation in business is not so much overused but a poor choice of word.