17th February 2007

Convincing the unconverted, Part 4

posted in Business Strategy, Convincing the uncoverted, Part 1-4, General Community Discussion, Social Media, Voice of Customer, Why Community Matters, web 2.0 |

[digg=http://digg.com/software/Convincing_the_unconverted_on_communities_Part_4]

Now for my favorite approach to convincing the unconverted on the importance of community. I call it the assumptive close.

#4 The Assumptive Close

I have to admit, I really like this one. It’s almost a version of guilt combined with the already mentioned techniques. It essentially goes like this: "You are going to do it anyway. Why do you want to be last?" Users are going to talk about your products, policies, licensing, people, everything! You really don’t get to decide this. The only decision you get to make is whether or not to participate in that conversation. You must also accept the fact that you CANNOT control the conversation. In fact, the harder you try the more impossible it is. So, what I’m saying is that you (your company) are eventually going to get involved in community (it’s not some fad). Stop selling the company on whether or not to engage and tell them that it is a foregone conclusion that they will. You are here to discuss not the "if," but the when and the how. Got it? Good luck.

Sean

Popularity: 14% [?]

Share This

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 17th, 2007 at 7:57 am and is filed under Business Strategy, Convincing the uncoverted, Part 1-4, General Community Discussion, Social Media, Voice of Customer, Why Community Matters, web 2.0. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

There are currently 9 responses to “Convincing the unconverted, Part 4”

Why not let us know what you think by adding your own comment! Your opinion is as valid as anyone elses, so come on... let us know what you think.

  1. 1 On February 17th, 2007, Jack Dahlgren said:

    Sean,

    You write that you “cannot” control the conversation. While this may be true technically- by definition a conversation involves parties other than yourself who would be assumed to have free will but to assert that it is an impossibility does disservice to skilled conversationalists everywhere and detracts from the validity of your point. Absolutism is rarely defensible.

  2. 2 On February 17th, 2007, Kip Kniskern said:

    Hmm I tend to agree with Sean and not with Jack, in the context of communities around product. The days of controlling what is being said about your product (through aggressive PR, advertiser dollar clout with media companies, stifling dissenting voices from within, etc) are over. And indeed the harder you try to use those old school strong arm tactics, the more foolish you look, and the more harmful to your product you become. Much better to join in the conversation. Defend yourself as appropriate, offer company viewpoints (spin, if you must) on negative feedback, but most of all, listen. Community involvement then becomes a powerful tool in learning whether or not your message is getting through.

    Congrats on the move to WordPress, too, btw. Interested to hear your reasoning :).

  3. 3 On February 17th, 2007, Sean ODriscoll said:

    Jack/Kip:

    First, my sincere thanks for participating in this conversation!!

    Strictly semantically speaking, Jack may be right. I guess my thought in response would be that even in some rare circumstance that you could control the conversation, you shouldn’t. And if you do, it will quickly cease being a conversation that anyone is actually listening to.

    For some reason it reminds me of somthing someone once said that has stuck with me when it comes to communities (or simply being a conversationalist): “listening” is not “waiting for your turn to talk.” I like the active participation element implied by this for both parties.

    Sean

  4. 4 On February 18th, 2007, Jack Dahlgren said:

    Sean,

    I guess my whole problem with the “conversations” thing is that conversations existed a long time before the computer and the telephone. The thing that is different now is that companies (and whoever else) can listen in. Your last comment hits that point pretty well. Listening is key to PARTICIPATING in any conversation.

  5. 5 On November 16th, 2007, "Happy Birthday" Community Group Therapy… : Community Group Therapy said:

    […] Convince the unconverted…part 4 […]

  6. 6 On November 16th, 2007, Blu-ray / HD DVD antipiracy code… : Community Group Therapy said:

    […] my earlier series starting with convincing the unconverted on community, I wrote in part 4 about the "assumptive close".  In it, I said the following: Users are going to talk […]

  7. 7 On November 16th, 2007, Is your Baby Ugly? aka - convincing the unconverted on communities…part V : Community Group Therapy said:

    […] Part 4:  Assumptive Close […]

  8. 8 On November 16th, 2007, A guide for those that are new to this blog… : Community Group Therapy said:

    […] Part 4: The Assumptive Close […]

  9. 9 On November 16th, 2007, Does your company support employee blogging? : Community Group Therapy said:

    […] is to tell you HOW to do things…not just to tell you NOT to do things!!  See the assumptive close for a refresher.  They have genuine concerns about how IP gets shared and how IP is […]

Leave a Reply

rss posts

  • Categories