Very cool news this morning, as the province and city stepped up with historic designation and $1.25 million for McDougall Church.
A giant step forward in the fight to save McDougall Church! Proud to know my #NMN petition for @JessL's class helped.
http://t.co/K6roT9NtkL
— Scott Rollans (@ScottRollans) April 1, 2015
The money will help address McDougall's most urgent short-term repairs, and the designation will help provide momentum for the continuing task of finding a long-term solution.
Of course, the petition formed just one part of the effort by the Friends of McDougall—and a great deal of work lies ahead—but I'm so thrilled to have made a difference.
If you watch CTV News' coverage of the announcement, you can even spot me singing (tall bald guy in the back row!).
The reading by Vladimir Zwass was interesting from the perspective that it touched on many aspects of the material explored thus far in my MACT journey. It was a bit of a ‘light-bulb’ read for me in that I felt like my understanding of this article was enhanced because of a strong theoretical foundation. The most succinct alignment is rooted in the con-current course several of us are enrolled in, Using and Managing Communication Networks, which focuses on the study of virtual/online communities. The definition of an online community, ways in which to motivate contribution and the role that trust plays in a community or project have been fundamental concepts throughout the coursework.
From a co-creation standpoint, understanding the dynamics of a community can lead to a deeper understanding of the potential for collaboration. An online community can be defined as group of people that come together for a shared purpose in order to cooperate, collaborate and work towards a common goal. The users share a core set of values, interests and a strong set of secondary connections. Vibrant virtual communities are critical to effective co-creation.
Zwass defines co-creation as the creation of value by consumers, (2010, p. 11). It can also be defined as “the participation of consumers along with producers in the creation of value in the marketplace,” (p. 13). This definition is expanded through the reading with a focus on defining two type of co-creation, sponsored and autonomous. In sponsored co-creation, organizations open themselves to the co-creation efforts of external individuals, including present or potential consumers. In autonomous co‐creation, individuals or consumer communities produce marketable value in voluntary activities conducted independently.
In both instances, the role of the consumer and the producer is being redefined in unprecedented ways. The line between producer and consumer is also becoming increasingly blurred.
Technology development and use means that new forms of production are emerging at a rapid rate. Van Dijck, suggests new interactive platforms “promise to make culture more participatory, user centered, and collaborative,” (p. 10). The context for much of Van Dijck’s commentary can be related to his idea that websites are conduits for activity and the new platforms of today have turned these conduits into new ways of delivering goods.
Zwass suggests that the nature of goods involved in co-creation is specific in that the goods are all digital and available to anyone with access. “ The collective processes of sharing data, information, and knowledge in the digital domain by individuals vastly contribute to the growth of co-creation activities” (2010, p. 14). With the mass adoption of technology, the major barrier to being a producer has shifted from lack of production capability to lack of knowledge. Readers can become authors almost instantaneously.
The following TED Talk used some practical examples to illustrate this point quite well.
The ability to become an author, producer or contributor is in part made possible by access to shared resources and information. Zwass defines commons as the universally shared resources owned in common (2010, p.18). The idea of common ownership (or lack of ownership) is such a new phenomenon in the face of copyright and individualism. Commons only works on the backs of those who are procuring or authoring with belief that the greater good is most important. Personally, I feel like a move towards Open Data within municipalities is a demonstration of this shift in thinking. While it is possible to make data open, it takes collective will and intelligence to make something of the information. This is where co-creation and collective intelligence are exercised.
The emergence of intelligent behavior in a collective has been described by Surowiecki as the “wisdom of crowds,” generating the concept of crowd- sourcing, (as cited in Zwass, 2010, p. 19). Crowd sourced information can be useful as prediction, preference, or idea-generation. In the example of Open Data, idea generation would be at the forefront of this collective work.
Trust creation is defined by Zwass as a reputation system built by:
Word of mouth promotion
Collective Sense making
Ranking
Sentiment Expression
Task Redistribution
Trust in itself is a complex concept to study and understand. Trust in an online community carries this same level of complexity with fundamentally similar characteristics to the real-world; only there is a new level of understanding that needs to be applied in relation to the digital aspect of the online model of interaction.
March 31: Tweet @JessL something that you’ve just learnt from a reading
April 4: Think about all the readings you have done and all the games that you have played (board games, playground games, computer games, ipad games, nintendo games etc…) in relation to what Dr. Mark Butler says about time and that all games create their own idea of time and don’t always maintain that idea (see the video of his talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ag5MMKkk0k, see his ideas at about the 5 minute point though the video is 20 minutes). Write a blog comment on my Module 11 blog post explaining your thoughts
April 8: Write a blog post in which you reflect on the course. What has been new to you? Have any of the readings, discussions, blog conversations, tweets etc.. changed how you thought of any of the topics? What readings really made an impression on you? What are your key take-aways? Is there anything you might change in the future (tweet more often, run a crowd-funding project, look at selfies in a different way)
Kickstarter. Crowdsourcing. Another way that people have
found out to get out of anonymity online. This phenomenon is explained in the
dictionary as being popular thanks to the internet: “the practice of obtaining
needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large
group of people and especially from the online community rather than from
traditional employees or suppliers” (Merriam-webster.com, 2015).
So, Kickstarter, as a crowdsource, is “a new way to fund
creative projects” (Kickstarter.com, 2015) because on the internet, people “have
complete control over and responsibility for their projects” (Kickstarter.com,
2015). In a blog article Yannig Roth’s (2012) suggests thatcrowdsourcing works because it complements
the traditional co-creation -- “[the]creative and social collaboration process
between producers and consumers, facilitated by the company (Piller et al., as
cited in Roth, 2014). This might be true as many unsuccessful kickstarter
projects seem to lack the “organisational knowledge” (Roth, 2014) that the traditional
co-creation usually involves. When co-creation and crowdsourcing are blended
together, they bring up to the surface nice and successful new media stories.
This idea is valid if we look at the story of Jaded
Gamercast: Adepticon Double Date, a Kickstarter project created by Lange
Grinevitch from Edmonton, AB, who succeeded to go way over his goal (159%
funded). No doubt, this story succeeded on Kickstarter, mostly because his
creator nicely blended the traditional co-creation with crowdsourcing: first, there
is a clarity about what is being kickstarted: miniature gaming podcasts, called
Jaded
Gamer Cast (offered for free 200+ episodes if the project reaches it’s goal);
second, the creator calls backers to action through a simple story, using the internet
crowdsourcing multimodality (videos and pictures).
Another successful story is 'Time
as Moments' Designer Clock created by Donald
Papp from Edmonton, AB. The Kickstarter project was successfully funded (164%) as it promotes an ingenious and
unique work of art,something practical and relatively cheap: “Each
number becomes clearly defined only once each hour before becoming once again
unclear. The design reflects time as moments.” The project is successful, although
it is presented in an incredible simple way: there is only a picture of the
clock and only a few words used for description. It is astonishing how the image
speaks for itself and so, it gathers so many backers. Perhaps, if other forms
of crowdsourcing have been used, such as videos, this project might have had gathered
even more supporters. Again, like the previous project, this stands out due to its clarity and simplicity.
However, the elements of traditional co-creation (“social collaboration process …facilitated by
a company”) are not present. The project succeeds only because the product is unique.
An example of unsuccessful
project is Living
Necklaces! Beauty and Nature to Wear by Your Heart! created by Tara from Edmonton,
AB. Although this project looks like one of a kind -- “[t]his empty necklace
will contain a thriving, healthy moss or fern, keeping nature right over your
heart!” -- the number of backers is 0. Why this is unsuccessful? Perhaps due to
its’ lack of practicality– who would wear around his neck a bottle with a fern
inside? Plus, the jewellery-plant will definitely die outside during the Edmonton’s
winter months. Besides, there are no elements of “organizational knowledge” of
a co-creation, and the multimodality (i.e. video) is also missing. Perhaps,Tara’s project might have had chances
of success among flower-lovers if the piece would have been designed for indoors,
as an ornamental plant.
These three kickstarter projects, make me believe that crowdsourcing
nicely complements the traditional co-creation. However, crowdsourcing projects
can stand by themselves without traditional co-creation as long as the projects
are unique and presented with clarity, simplicity through new media
multimodality.
Merriam-webster.com,. (2015). crowdsourcing | the
practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting
contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online
community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers. Retrieved 27
March 2015, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crowdsourcing
Roth, Y. (May 2012). “Crowdsourcing and CoCreation are Complementary”.
Innovation Excellence.
Raising funds to kickstart your dreams has risen to a new level with crowdfunding; entrepeneurs, artists and activists utilize crowdfunding platforms such as Kickstarter to help raise funds to launch and hopefully, turn their hope from a dream to a reality.
Crowdfunding has become a widely accepted way to raise funds by seeking support from local community involvement, although this is not a requisite as investors can be from anywhere on the web. Canada held its first Crowdfunding Summitin Toronto the week of March 3, 2015, that brought like minded people together to cover all aspects of crowdfunding.
In the province of Alberta, crowdfunding is popular and is currently being used to raise funds for many endeavours. Three I have focused on are the following:
A couple, Sylvia and Darren Cheverie, who want to bring an authentic French Canadian restaurant to the Alberta Canadian town of Beaumont, Alberta have turned to Kickstarter to help them make their cream possible. The owners hope they can get people to band together to create something bigger. The town of Beaumont has a history of neighbours helping each other and this is promoted in the spirit of their campaign. In their promo video they state they feel this is fundamental to Kickstarter.
Sylvia and Darren currently have140 backers, having raised $40,941 towards their goal of $95,000, with 39 days to go in their campaign.
I think the presentation of their project is well thought out and presented with a great video that introduces them to their potential backers. The have researched the history of the town and brought in many players, like the chef and baker, to supplement and support their project. They've done a great job.
Drawings for a dollar! by Jessie Somers sought to find supporters who would allow her to exercise her creative talents and encourage her to draw. Jessie offered supporters a fantasy drawings from her, which she would mail to the supporter, for $1. Jessie quickly met her fundraising goals and as she states in her notes, made some typical first time errors such as not calculating shipping costs.
She currently has 127 backers, having raised $1,616 towards her $500 goal. She still has 28 days to go in her campaign.
Jessie was very successful in her first attempt at Kickstarter and aside for doing some research into additional costs, has succeeded in her first attempt at Kickstarter. This was a smart project because she is entirely within control of the project and needs little resources to meet the requirements established between she and her supporters.
The third project is Tiny Houses by Heather Giles and Brad Penney. The two are attempting to raise money to support their plan to build tiny houses for people who cannot afford typical mortgages. An added bonus is these homes are mobile and can be towed on a trailer, allowing you to transport your 160 square foot home with you. The car/truck does not come with the house!
They currently have one backer, who has pledged $150 of their $25,000 goal, with 12 days to go.
What Heather and Brad could have done to garner more support was perhaps show the process of building one of these houses, to show they can build them. A video of the process, with a few drawings of the interior would have been very helpful. Is the house in the picture a house they made themselves? More information about timelines and plans for the houses would definitely have helped. Also, give people an indication of how easy are they to transport, offer to come see one built and provide more details overall, would encourage people to invest or at least consider their project.
Obviously, some projects are more appealing to the public than others, but Kickstarter clearly has potential. It's really up to the project and their developers to develop their pitch. Its left me wondering if I can use this method to fund my journey around the world on my sailboat.
While I am familiar with the concept of crowdsourcing, I had never actually spent much time looking at the breadth of projects available to fund. From the serious to the ridiculous, from the clever to the mainstream there does seem to be something for every type of interest on the Kickstarter site. I chose to analyze three projects with different intentions and varying degrees of creativity as well as support.
This project immediately appealed to me in part, because of a passion for the arts and in particular dance. The video immediately drew me in with a sense of professionalism as well as openness and authenticity. As a dance teacher I was also encouraged by the caliber of the company portrayed through the footage. The text narrative enhanced my understanding of the sense of this company in relation to their community connection. It also used an emotional appeal by expressing a string desire to not only succeed as a Company but to grow opportunities for dancers in Alberta and in Canada.
They are a third of the way to goal with six days remaining so I would say it is moderately successful.
In terms of recommendations, I think the video could have been even more powerful if it was a bit shorter or was separated into a couple of impactful clips. Also, I would consider changing the music to something a bit more uplifting to change the tone of the request. The mood created was somewhat melancholy which negatively contrasted an uplifting message.
I was so intrigued by the product and message I am planning on backing this project! I think the product itself is creative and practical and these characteristics are reflected in the content as well as the design.
The style of the video and use of statistics was powerful! I was also impressed by the name & logo and the play on words that were developed to create a compelling closing statement. ReThnk Ink. ReWrite. ReNote. ReDraw. ReMember. ReInk.
In the text based narrative, the description of the product is concise. The idea of personalization is also key and should resonate with a generation that is used to accessing custom options. They have included illustrations to highlight the rewards in a more artistic way which is consistent with the style and energy of the site.
There has been some moderate interest generated.
From a recommendation standpoint, I wonder if the name gives enough insight into the project? I think the recyclable aspect deserves more of the focus than the personalization. Perhaps Reink: a Reusable Notebook would garner more attention, particularly from a target market interested in sustainable products.
Viewing a project without a video certainly shows the stark comparison between multimedia and text based project descriptions. I also didn’t find the narrative to be particularly compelling or descriptive. My first thoughts were that it looked like a shed or a trailer so I wasn’t convinced of its uniqueness in the marketplace.
Without an interior shot or details on how one lives (electricity, plumbing, etc.) it seemed to be lacking any sort of business case or plan.
Wile the idea of living in a small affordable space has merit, I would recommend additional development of the case through a video that features that speaks to the benefits and describes how you actually live in this space.
With this, I chose three Kickstarter ventures to analyze using the AIDA approach:
Chartier by Darren and Sylvia Cheverie
I first saw this one featured on Edmonton's Shaw Community TV Channel 10 - yes, I am that kind of person. Anyway, Darren and Sylvia want to open a Quebecois-cuisine restaurant in the Capital region's very own Paris of the Prairies - sorry, Winnipeg! I'm talking about Beaumont, AB, just a half hour's drive south of Edmonton. Their message draws in the reader by starting with a love story about themselves, then tying it in to creating roots in Beaumont and fostering its Francophone culture with food (they had me at roots, BTW, warm fuzzies and all). While it does not follow the AIDA approach 100%, it contains all of the elements, and its desire segment is multifaceted - they even offer hugs when you come in for your first meal as a donor. It just needs a bit of tweaking to make the message's end more action-oriented - reminding people of the time limit and the rewards would reinforce the message. Its strongest element, however, is its video:
No launch date is given, but site comments start at March 6, and they have until May 4 to reach $95,000 - as of March 25, they are almost halfway there, and no wonder - they have used Sylvia's marketing know-how to create a very powerful message.
Imagination Studio by William Steed
I chose this last one as it is reminiscent of Curiosity Hacked's Open Lab concept for kids. William has an innovative idea here but has presented it in a direct-message form - main idea, details, positive close requesting action. He has embedded a video, but the message is different from that in the text - it tells a story of how donors and clients would benefit, but that's left to the last 30-45 seconds of the video. I am unsure as to whether most would get there, however, as the speed of new images flashing across the screen is so high, I actually got nauseated watching it:
Perhaps others have as well, for the $100k project has only $256 in pledges with 6 days left.
Alberta Legislature Grounds Mirror for PC MLA's by Marc Doll
Okay, so this one is entirely a parody - its creator even says so! "Chances of this project [$150k by April 4, 2015] coming to fruition are between zero and well none...but what the hell...let's have some fun" (para. 2). Doll has chosen emphasize this by only including information under the Risks and Challenges banner, so he is trying to dissuade contributors. Doll is instead trying to bring to attention the fact that the ruling Progressive Conservative government MLA's only need look in the mirror to identify who is at fault for Alberta's current fiscal crisis. He could have emphasized this further in his message and instead asked site visitors instead to take action by emailing their MLA's or using SM to spread the word.
