-
All responses Most smiled responses
-
asked by craignicolGreat question!
I really believe it's a hybrid of both - a true Software PLUS Services model. Computers are getting more and more powerful. We can do so much with them now - including the ability to run some pretty hefty software.
At the same time, a lot of what we do doesn't need to happen locally - and indeed is better managed as a central resource allowing ease of access from wherever I am.
So things like productivity, communication and collaboration stuff absolutely have a future on the web - and all of the big software players are contributing great things in that area already.
But there will always be things that a full-fat OS will be good for - running those meaty media apps, allowing you to take things offline, giving you a great gaming experience...
What I'd love to see in 5-10 years time is a world where all of these things work seamlessly together.
But I think we'll always need that hybrid approach, flexible enough for everyone, for us to continue to evolve and create great stuff using technology. -
In many ways, your Digital Identity is what you make it - especially where services like Twitter and Facebook are concerned.
There's no one right way to use a service like that. How you want to be seen on the web is, in most cases, a personal choice - there are things I'd say to close friends offline that I'd never tweet, but then there are some people who don't mind the world knowing their in-depth secrets.
Do those services contribute to your identity? Certainly - people who meet me at events often comment that they've been following me on Twitter long before they actually meet me in person - and as such they know me best through what I tweet.
Are they everything? No. Soft skills, personality, and passion play a huge part - whether you're talking digitally or in the offline world, if you've got an abrasive personality then you'll run up against the same problems in both.
I don't see my digital identity as anything more than a part of my identity as a whole - professionally, I am me online, and I'm me offline. Others keep much more of a separation - and that's OK too.
As always, it's good to look before you leap - take a look at some of the many examples out there of people who have used social media and it's come back to bite them - or those who have used it and got a lot out of it. -
In the interests of not writing an epic 'War & Peace' style response:
Firstly - recycling an old classic - Stop, Look & Listen. Don't jump in and start publicising your company/product - look and see how your customers are using those channels.
Then - and most important of all - start having conversations. If you're out to use those channels as a sales announcement platform then I'm sorry - go directly to jail and do not pass go. The social web is all about connections, sharing, and conversing.
Be prepared to take the rough with the smooth - the good feedback with the not so good - and talk openly and honestly about who you are and what you do. You'll quickly find that you've earned a lot more respect than a sales stream could get you.
There are loads of great books and blogs on the topic - well worth a read if this is something you're looking at. -
To answer the question with a qusetion - should a company worry as to whether its employees are happy, passionate people?
Tweeting at work can be a ringing endorsement for your company - showing the world that you're a company of real people, faces, personalities, and passionate people. It gets people excited about what's on the horizon, and about what you do.
But then consider the disgruntled employee - give them a soapbox and, well, they'll use it.
I don't think 'worry' is the right word - a company should be aware of Twitter, and perhaps put out a few guidelines (if you're tweeting personally, state that your views are your own, etc) and be sure employees don't break non-disclosure agreements etc. Twitter is a conversation - and can be a brilliant channel for actually engaging with your customer/audiences with very minimal overhead.
But on the whole, I'm one of a whole bunch of consumers that trusts a company far more if I can follow the people that work there, see what goes on - it offers a level of transparency that, in this day and age, is gold dust. -
I think the retro technology lover in me will always be tempted to say yes to the having to work hard to make a bit of tech do 'something different' - but I think it comes down to what's good for the industry as a whole.
Technology 20 years ago was very much a 'hack it together' affair - you'd hire experts to create something very bespoke and almost perfect for the job you wanted, and that was that.
There's a lot to be said for the freedom of choice that the 21st century has given us - people aren't tied to one platform, and most apps and OS can talk to one another with relative ease.
I think we're always going to have what I call 'complicated menu syndrome' though - when there are so many choices, and all of them look good, it's hard to choose what to have for dinner.
Maybe we need to think less about limiting the choice, and more about creating a better menu - one that allows people to look before they leap, and maybe even a few sampler platters to share before they have to make their minds up. -
Naturally not a question I can answer in an unbiased way, given as I work with the Microsoft solution and have had much more of a limited experience with the Google offering.
From what I've seen, both products are good in many ways - and the competition between the two has really helped create some amazing and innovative solutions for the education space.
I've seen the Microsoft solution evolve so much over the past 24 months, and it's something I'm genuinely proud to be working with the company on.
I won't go any deeper than that in this answer - but invite anyone (question asker or whoever else is reading) to get in touch and I'll be happy to talk details around the Microsoft offering and let you draw your own conclusion/comparison. -
It entirely depends - does repeated writing on a regular whiteboard actually help improve handwriting? Is the handwriting ability of the teacher important? In the 21st century, where it's all about the learner, I don't think it matters too much as long as it's all about the student - so if the resources are typed and printed, or typed and projected, that's just fine as long as the students learn and understand.
That said, I can completely understand that, in the age where many see handwriting as a dying art, people would be keen to see students learning by example.
Personally - my handwriting was always poor, and since I left school I've written very little by hand. I do, however, wish that my handwriting was better, and perhaps if I'd been exposed to better handwriting I'd have learned by example back in primary school.
Very thought provoking question!
-
Loading...
Ben Nunney’s Bio
All about education technology and social media - on here as a bit of an experiment, really...
