<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Adjusting Business to a Networked World</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/</link>
	<description>Developing tools for customer independence and engagement with vendors</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 13:12:02 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16699</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:29:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16699</guid>
		<description>Thanks, MIke. I think I do need shorter, more frequent posts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, MIke. I think I do need shorter, more frequent posts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeRiddell62</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16671</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeRiddell62</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16671</guid>
		<description>Doc, 

that fourth party is all a bit heavy really. i get the gist but it takes a while to sink in!

Point is, i think people get VRM - or at least those that count do.

Isn&#039;t it better to spend your time finding the right project to get it started on somewhere? You are probably onto it somewhere already but i have an idea that i will be coming back to you on soon...

Meanwhile the pricing thing is interesting. free, fremium etc - the Anderson/gladwell debate. I wonder if we will go below zero. yep. below zero. to a place where you get paid for changing your behaviour to save the earth&#039;s resources. &quot;A penny spent on prevention is better than the fivepence spent on the cure&quot; - or something similar!

VRM can sort this platform that puts a value, NOT on consumption, but on saving.

It&#039;s coming i reckon and when it does it will change so much and i think that your VRM concept is just the ticket.

trouble is though, which vehicle do you as an individual trust enough to look after your information? for me, its either me, or my community.

Will be in touch.

Keep up the good work, but keep the posts a bit shorter eh?

:-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doc, </p>
<p>that fourth party is all a bit heavy really. i get the gist but it takes a while to sink in!</p>
<p>Point is, i think people get VRM &#8211; or at least those that count do.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t it better to spend your time finding the right project to get it started on somewhere? You are probably onto it somewhere already but i have an idea that i will be coming back to you on soon&#8230;</p>
<p>Meanwhile the pricing thing is interesting. free, fremium etc &#8211; the Anderson/gladwell debate. I wonder if we will go below zero. yep. below zero. to a place where you get paid for changing your behaviour to save the earth&#8217;s resources. &#8220;A penny spent on prevention is better than the fivepence spent on the cure&#8221; &#8211; or something similar!</p>
<p>VRM can sort this platform that puts a value, NOT on consumption, but on saving.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s coming i reckon and when it does it will change so much and i think that your VRM concept is just the ticket.</p>
<p>trouble is though, which vehicle do you as an individual trust enough to look after your information? for me, its either me, or my community.</p>
<p>Will be in touch.</p>
<p>Keep up the good work, but keep the posts a bit shorter eh?</p>
<p> <img src='http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Cass</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16588</link>
		<dc:creator>John Cass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 04:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16588</guid>
		<description>I really think twitter is all about search, and that VRM is where Twitter is going to develop its value both for companies and for users in general. 

Google Adwords is really a system for aggregating leads. 

I now use twitter search more than I do Google, mainly because I have twhirl turned on all day and I&#039;m watching my automated searches pop up throughout the day. Mainly I ignore the searches, but sometimes I don&#039;t. I also scanned through the searches on a daily basis. 

I can use twitter search to find leads. And those leads are probably just as qualified as any google adwords leads. The issue for twitter is: How can the tool aggregate leads in the same way Google adwords does?  The issue for the marketer is how do you respond to customers through social media. 

Now that I&#039;m writing this I am also realizing that Twitter search will probably teach a generation of marketers how to do in depth engagement, just as Google Adwords taught a generation of marketers about the ROI.

I might be writing about leads and putting this from the perspective of the company, but really twitter search is all about giving power to the customer to manage their relationship with brands and companies, when thinking about VRM.

I hope you are working with the folks at Twitter in helping to develop their search engine, because its key for their company, and I believe VRM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really think twitter is all about search, and that VRM is where Twitter is going to develop its value both for companies and for users in general. </p>
<p>Google Adwords is really a system for aggregating leads. </p>
<p>I now use twitter search more than I do Google, mainly because I have twhirl turned on all day and I&#8217;m watching my automated searches pop up throughout the day. Mainly I ignore the searches, but sometimes I don&#8217;t. I also scanned through the searches on a daily basis. </p>
<p>I can use twitter search to find leads. And those leads are probably just as qualified as any google adwords leads. The issue for twitter is: How can the tool aggregate leads in the same way Google adwords does?  The issue for the marketer is how do you respond to customers through social media. </p>
<p>Now that I&#8217;m writing this I am also realizing that Twitter search will probably teach a generation of marketers how to do in depth engagement, just as Google Adwords taught a generation of marketers about the ROI.</p>
<p>I might be writing about leads and putting this from the perspective of the company, but really twitter search is all about giving power to the customer to manage their relationship with brands and companies, when thinking about VRM.</p>
<p>I hope you are working with the folks at Twitter in helping to develop their search engine, because its key for their company, and I believe VRM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Noel</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16331</link>
		<dc:creator>Noel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 07:07:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16331</guid>
		<description>Yeah Doc but only to a point.

With the social sites now driving the search engines you can see where they are going, most of them into  the hands of the big ad providers. This will enevitaby then drive mobile access to these sites at a rapid pace. This needs to happen for those investors to get the returns they require...and so we will then have access to those sites where ever we may be thus driving revenue.

Love the posts Doc 
thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah Doc but only to a point.</p>
<p>With the social sites now driving the search engines you can see where they are going, most of them into  the hands of the big ad providers. This will enevitaby then drive mobile access to these sites at a rapid pace. This needs to happen for those investors to get the returns they require&#8230;and so we will then have access to those sites where ever we may be thus driving revenue.</p>
<p>Love the posts Doc<br />
thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Torrenegra</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16211</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander Torrenegra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16211</guid>
		<description>Thank you for the great post Doc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the great post Doc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/07/06/adjusting-business-to-a-networked-world/comment-page-1/#comment-16143</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=170#comment-16143</guid>
		<description>Ok, I love all the points you&#039;ve made.  And yes, I see many of them work well.  As a counter point to the music example, my belief is that the legality + accessibility of the music is what gave Apple their 2.5B sales. But if you compare an accessible free (and legal) song to an accessible $0.99 legal song (being the same song), we&#039;ll obviously take the free one.  If we take that example and compare it to the example that many people (including me) give with journalism, we as the general public are much happier to get the information for free and not pay a dime.  

The problem is in the conditioning.  We&#039;re taught that free is always better than paid content with all other things being equal.  The problem is that we have to learn the hard way that if we don&#039;t give our money (or some other thing of value) to those who supply us with what we want, that in the end, we&#039;ll more often than not end up without that product/service at all at the quality we once were used to.  Free is unsustainable.

Otherwise, I love where we&#039;re going.  I love the cutting edge and that you and other smart people are thinking of how we can flip this whole thing on it&#039;s head.  This is the true beginning of the end of the Industrial Revolution.  Until the majority of the market moves there, we haven&#039;t changed (regardless of the new term some people give our current age: &quot;Information Age&quot; and whatnot).

Thanks for the brilliant writings and thoughtfulness Doc.  I&#039;ve always been a fan of yours, and I&#039;m excited that you&#039;ve seen some value in a few things I&#039;ve done, as unintentional as those things might have been.

Cheers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, I love all the points you&#8217;ve made.  And yes, I see many of them work well.  As a counter point to the music example, my belief is that the legality + accessibility of the music is what gave Apple their 2.5B sales. But if you compare an accessible free (and legal) song to an accessible $0.99 legal song (being the same song), we&#8217;ll obviously take the free one.  If we take that example and compare it to the example that many people (including me) give with journalism, we as the general public are much happier to get the information for free and not pay a dime.  </p>
<p>The problem is in the conditioning.  We&#8217;re taught that free is always better than paid content with all other things being equal.  The problem is that we have to learn the hard way that if we don&#8217;t give our money (or some other thing of value) to those who supply us with what we want, that in the end, we&#8217;ll more often than not end up without that product/service at all at the quality we once were used to.  Free is unsustainable.</p>
<p>Otherwise, I love where we&#8217;re going.  I love the cutting edge and that you and other smart people are thinking of how we can flip this whole thing on it&#8217;s head.  This is the true beginning of the end of the Industrial Revolution.  Until the majority of the market moves there, we haven&#8217;t changed (regardless of the new term some people give our current age: &#8220;Information Age&#8221; and whatnot).</p>
<p>Thanks for the brilliant writings and thoughtfulness Doc.  I&#8217;ve always been a fan of yours, and I&#8217;m excited that you&#8217;ve seen some value in a few things I&#8217;ve done, as unintentional as those things might have been.</p>
<p>Cheers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
