Google launched Sidewiki, an add-on to their ubiquitous toolbar, which lets you “contribute helpful information to any page.” You’d think they grew horns, a tail, and started carrying a pitchfork.

Does anyone else see the irony here? Blogs & other social media tools move control of the collective conversation away from established players (corporations, governments, etc.) and give it to the individual. Now we have as much reach and influence as as multi-billion dollar corporation… in theory anyway.

But look out! Here comes Google Sidewiki!

Jeff Jarvis warns: “I have no control over the content associated with my site, essentially on my site.” He worries that someone will post negative comments. And he’s right– that will happen. But that’s beside the point.

You may own the URL, but the user owns the browser.

How about an analogy? I’ve been picketed. Seriously. The company I used to work for ran out of money and couldn’t pay vendors. Some of those vendors decided to picket. They hooted, hollered, jumped up and down, waved their signs at passing cars. It sucked.But it was a conversation that was happening about our company, right outside our doors, on public property– and there wasn’t a damn thing we could do about it. Think of that failed business as your website, and the sidewalk as the user’s web browser. The picketers are obviously comments in Sidewiki. Not a perfect analogy, I know. But you get the idea.

So, to those of you worried about losing control of the conversation on your websites, I suggest you heed your own advice: join the conversation and be authentic.

You never truly had control anyway.

Take a look at this microwave.

Notice the letters around the dial?

Now, take a look at this iron.

Notice how you hold the iron flat and lift up the flap to fill the water reservoir?

What glaring difference do you see–other than one cooks, and one irons? What were they thinking?

I’d venture that the microwave people thought about how to make their own lives simpler. Letters take up less space than numbers around that dial. A nice clean interface, right? Nope. We don’t think like that about cooking times: “Hmm, I’m going to cook my soup for F, stir, and cook for an additional U.” So they had to add the legend next to the actual cook time. Now it’s  cluttered and confusing.

I bet the iron people thought about how to make their customer’s lives simpler. By orienting the opening for the water reservoir so it flips up when the iron is flat, it was much easier to fill using the sink instead of a cup or a funnel… or making a huge mess.

So, when you’re designing your next product/service/experience/ad/press release/story/joke/dinner, whatever you do, don’t imagine a mini devil-me on your shoulder asking: “what are you thinking?!”

This post, over at The Planning Lab, reminded me of a sketch I did last year.

Barack Obama tapped into the Groundswell during his campaign. He recognized that people were connecting with each other to get the things they need, rather than going to traditional institutions. He recognized the power of a bottom-up strategy and how an army of energized campaign partners–not just supporters– is infinitely more effective than the old way. Top down just doesn’t work like it used to!

Now they’ve won the election. What’s next?

Governing.

How will the Obama administration tap into the Groundswell when it comes time to govern? How will we be involved? How will we involve ourselves? What if you got an email or a Tweet or a text message from the President explaining why he needs your support for Project A? Telling you where to find more information, and asking you to act. To call, email, fax, and write to your Senators and Representatives. To go out canvasing, knocking on doors. Think about what that would do to the traditional seats of power in our nation– in the world! Asymetrical competition at its finest. 

So, what lessons can business learn from the Obama victory?

• Trade control for conversation. The idea of control is stupid anyway– you don’t own your brand, your customers do. No matter how big, how strong, how old you are, your customers actually hold the power. And they know it. So listen to them. Talk with them. And listen some more. If you’re authentic, they will embrace you and can become your most valuable marketing stewards.
• Segmentation sucks. We marketing types love to slice and dice the market and tell different stories to the different parts. And that still works. Sort of. Top-down strategy starts broad and progressively segments, targets and positions more and more. It gets so granular that you need a cheesecloth to collect the pieces. Bottom-up starts with the little bits and pieces, finds the common themes and molds all those disparate pieces into something much better, much grander, much more desireable than the pieces on their own. So focus on the common, not the differences. 
• Your competition isn’t who you think it is. Obama wasn’t even an underdog–by all traditional measures of advantage, he didn’t stand a chance against the Clinton political machine. He didn’t have traditional advantages, but he had new ones. He had a clear, compelling and consistent message: yes we can. He wasn’t selling anything; he was supporting us. New strategy isn’t about how well you can sell, or even how well you can market. It’s about how well you support your users. It’s about helping them be the change the wish to see in the world. That’s the company you should be. And that’s the kind of company you should watch out for.
• Block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand. The Obama campaign built a truly vast network of campaign partners, and they did it one conversation at a time, one micro-interaction at a time to spread that clear, compelling, consistent message. When you get people involved and emotionally invested, they’ll take ownership. Ownership = loyal customers.

There are exciting times ahead and I can’t wait.

On his blog last week, Tim Brown (IDEO bacon-double-big-cheese) tells a story about an insulated coffee mug he received as a gift. Then he asks a ridiculously simple question: “is this a product or an experience?” 

I don’t like the idea of crushing the competition into an pulsating pile of people-pulp. But I worry that if I don’t, they may not be so kind in return. Insert bland reference to jujitsu/kung-fu/etc. here. My problem with crushing the competition– or even using the competition against itself (think jujitsu)–is that the customer is left as a spectator at best and/or collateral damage at worst. So if your focus is 3 months at a time and a 10Q is your Holy Writ, sweep the leg johnny! (80s gold @ 1:40 and 4:05) But if you truly want to provide a great product/service/experience for your users, maybe you should think about collaboration as a competitive strategy. think about what you’re good at, what you’re bad at, and what you love to do– your strengths, weaknesses and your “bliss.” now do the same for your competition. if there’s 100% overlap, maybe this isn’t the way to go. But, if there are areas of differentiation…