Weekly Business Insights – Week 219

Extractive summaries of the articles curated from TOP TEN BUSINESS MAGAZINES to promote informed business decision making | Week 219 |November 19-25, 2021

Download this week’s edition in PDF

Download this week’s edition in Audio

Shaping Section : Ideas and forces shaping economies and industries

The future of the internet

The Economist | November 20, 2021

When, on October 28th, Mr Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook as Meta Platforms, to signal his commitment to the new idea, many assumed it was a PR stunt to divert attention from the social-media giant’s scandals. When Satya Nadella and Jensen Huang, the bosses of Microsoft and Nvidia, made their own pitches a couple of weeks later, people muttered about bandwagon-jumping.  There are good reasons to take the metaverse seriously.

One is historical: as computers have become more capable, the experiences that they generate have become richer. The internet began its life displaying nothing more exciting than white text on a black background. Flat images were added in the 1990s. Video came to dominate in the 2010s. On that reading, a move into three dimensions is a logical consequence of the steady growth in computing power.  That progression is more than merely theoretical. Google Maps already offers a virtual space that contains the real world’s stations, shops, and streets. The video-game industry—the only type of entertainment fully exposed to the compounding power of Moore’s law—has been selling virtual worlds for years. “EverQuest”, an online game launched in 1999, had half a million subscribers at its peak. (Players quickly co-opted it for socialising, and even weddings, as well as dragon-slaying.)  Many spend their real money on virtual goods. It is hard to argue that an idea will never catch on when, for millions of people, it already has.

Finally mockery, as recently a satirical ad from Iceland has mocked Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s efforts to rebrand his company into “Meta” by introducing audiences to the reality of the “Icelandverse”,  is an unreliable guide to the future. When YouTube was launched in 2005, commentators wondered why anyone would want to watch spotty teenagers filming themselves in their bedrooms when the delights of cable tv were a button-push away. In two decades, this virtual place has become a perfectly normal way to meet people. Smartphones are some of the bestselling devices ever built. In the 1990s their brick-sized predecessors were mocked as crass status symbols for insecure investment bankers.

This does not mean every Silicon Valley brainwave will automatically succeed. Nor does it mean a fully-fledged metaverse will arrive overnight, any more than the world wide web or the mobile internet did. But it does suggest that something metaverse-shaped lying in the relatively near future is an idea worth taking seriously.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. When, on October 28th, Mr Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook as Meta Platforms, to signal his commitment to the new idea, many assumed it was a PR stunt to divert attention from the social-media giant’s scandals. 
2. When Satya Nadella and Jensen Huang, the bosses of Microsoft and Nvidia, made their own pitches a couple of weeks later, people muttered about bandwagon-jumping.
3. All these suggest that something metaverse-shaped lying in the relatively near future is an idea worth taking seriously.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Technology, Metverse

GM Thought Operating in India Was Tough. Getting Out Is Even Harder

By Chris Kay and Ragini Saxena | Bloomberg Businessweek | November 18, 2021 

General Motors Co.’s 300-acre plant in the town of Talegaon in western India stands largely idle, as it has for most of the past year. Only a moldy layoff notice pinned outside the mothballed factory hints at the difficulties GM now faces in disentangling itself from the country. Four years after ceasing sales in India and more than a year since its final car for export rolled off the production line, the carmaker remains mired in legal challenges from the labor union to its sale of the factory complex to China’s Great Wall Motor Co..  Even as foreign investment in India increases rapidly, GM’s $1.1 billion in losses, followed by the political and legal woes keeping it from selling its business, is a stark warning to foreign investors.

Legal uncertainty is the most staring one.  Until August this year, a controversial law allowed the Indian government to retrospectively levy capital gains tax on foreign businesses for the indirect transfer of their Indian assets. It took years of fighting in arbitration courts by businesses, including oil and gas explorer Cairn Energy Plc and Vodafone Group Plc, before Delhi eventually rescinded the rule.  International investors also have often stumbled while navigating the byzantine rules and regulations implemented by India’s national government and its 36 states and union territories. Land acquisition at a price that won’t trigger contested claims or require bribes may be a problem, and electricity from the grid is unreliable. All the while, businesses must be prepared to face regular shakedowns and outright corruption.

Foreign direct investment in India surged 19% last year, but it still accounts for a smaller percentage of gross domestic product than in countries such as Singapore and Vietnam.  Nevertheless, with India drawing record levels of funding and listings on its stock markets, plus Modi increasingly promoting economic self-reliance for the country, it’s far from certain that his government will fret much over some existing foreign manufacturers’ leaving the country.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. General Motors Co.’s 300-acre plant in the town of Talegaon in western India stands largely idle, as it has for most of the past year. Only a moldy layoff notice pinned outside the mothballed factory hints at the difficulties GM now faces in disentangling itself from the country. 
2. Four years after ceasing sales in India and more than a year since its final car for export rolled off the production line, the carmaker remains mired in legal challenges from the labor union to its sale of the factory complex to China’s Great Wall Motor Co.
3. Even as foreign investment in India increases rapidly, GM’s $1.1 billion in losses, followed by the political and legal woes keeping it from selling its business, is a stark warning to foreign investors.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  India, Auto Industry, Foreign Direct Investment

Global Economics Intelligence executive summary, October 2021

McKinsey & Company | November 8, 2021

Despite the challenge of pandemic-related disruptions, the global economy is exhibiting strong overall demand. Industrial growth can be measured in almost all surveyed countries and the Eurozone. The global purchasing managers’ indexes (PMIs) for manufacturing and services show healthy expansion, with respective readings of 54.1 and 53.4. Unemployment is generally falling, and world trade has effectively recovered to pre-pandemic levels. The public-health situation has improved in most surveyed economies, especially as vaccines against COVID-19 have become more available and vaccination programs are finally making real progress. Public-health experts are guardedly optimistic but urge continued caution and emphasize the need for even wider vaccine distribution and acceptance.

The main economic challenges are supply-chain bottlenecks and rising inflation, a view reflected in the latest results from McKinsey’s Global Survey of economic sentiment. For the moment, these challenges pose significant obstacles to smoother postcrisis recovery paths, slowing industrial growth, suppressing consumer sentiment, and causing populations real hardship. Fortunately, most economists and forecasting institutions expect that these difficulties will be relatively short-lived. 

Industrial growth has been widespread. Individual manufacturing PMIs mainly show expansion. Readings remain strongest in the United States (58.4 in October) and the Eurozone (58.3); in India (55.9) the pace of expansion has quickened steadily for three months. In China and Russia, the indicator crossed into expansion in October. As for services growth, the PMIs for the sector in all surveyed economies show relatively strong expansion.

Trade growth has been strong but uneven. The most recent data is for August, when the CPB World Trade Monitor measured a month-on-month increase of 0.8% in world trade, after a decline of –1.4% in July. Based on strong growth in Chinese ports, the Container Throughput Index (ISL) rose to a historic high of 126.6 in August (123.4 in July). National data from August show trade increases in Brazil and Russia and declines in the eurozone and Russia.  Equity indexes exhibited mixed performance in September and October; consistent gains were recorded in markets in Russia and India.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. Despite the challenge of pandemic-related disruptions, the global economy is exhibiting strong overall demand. 
2. Industrial growth can be measured in almost all surveyed countries and the Eurozone. Unemployment is generally falling, and world trade has effectively recovered to pre-pandemic levels. 
3. The public-health situation has improved in most surveyed economies, especially as vaccines against COVID-19 have become more available and vaccination programs are finally making real progress. 

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Global Economy, International Trade, Inflation

The Project Economy Has Arrived

By Antonio Nieto-Rodriguez | Harvard Business Review Magazine | November–December 2021 Issue

Quietly but powerfully, projects have displaced operations as the economic engine of our times. That shift has been a long time coming.  During the 20th century, operations (which involve the running of organizations) created tremendous value, and they did so through advances in efficiency and productivity. But for most of the current century, productivity growth in Western economies has been almost flat, despite the explosion of the internet, shorter product life cycles, and exponential advances in AI and robotics.

Meanwhile, projects (which involve the changing of organizations) are increasingly driving both short-term performance and long-term value creation—through more-frequent organizational transformations, faster development of new products, quicker adoption of new technologies, and so on. This is becoming a global phenomenon.  In Germany, for example, projects have been rising steadily as a percentage of GDP since at least 2009, and in 2019 they accounted for as much as 41% of the total. Precise data is hard to come by for other countries, but similar percentages are likely to apply in most other Western economies. The percentages are probably even higher in China and other leading Asian economies, where project-based work has long been an important source of growth.  And we’re only just getting started.

Forward-looking companies have recognized the organizational implications of this surge. “Soon we will no longer have job descriptions,” one senior IBM talent executive told the author “We will have only project roles.”  But the stakes are high. According to the research firm the Standish Group, around 35% of the projects undertaken worldwide are successful. We can and we must do better. 

Projects are only as good as the people who run them. If managers and organizations want to build the competencies required to transform themselves and thrive in the new project economy, they’ll need to get comfortable devising strategies that are driven not by efficiency but by change. They’ll need to allocate more resources, budgets, and decision-making power to projects and project teams at the expense of the traditional departmental hierarchy. They’ll need a simple framework so that everybody in their organizations can get involved. They’ll need to build project management competencies and adopt new technologies. They’ll need to encourage a shift in focus from inputs and outputs to outcomes and value. They’ll need to broaden the scope of their ambitions for their projects, by including, for example, a focus on diversity and sustainability.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. Quietly but powerfully, projects (which involve the changing of organizations) have displaced operations (which involve the running of organizations) as the economic engine of our times. That shift has been a long time coming.  
2. Projects are increasingly driving both short-term performance and long-term value creation—through more-frequent organizational transformations, faster development of new products, quicker adoption of new technologies, and so on. 
3. If managers and organizations want to build the competencies required to transform themselves and thrive in the new project economy, they’ll need to get comfortable devising strategies that are driven not by efficiency but by change, for instance.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Project Management, Global Economy, Productivity

College campuses should learn the power of design from corporate America

By Suzanne Marie Musho | Fortune Magazine | November 22, 2021 

Numerous companies, including tech leaders like Salesforce and Spotify, have changed everything from the furniture to the desk layouts to better promote collaboration. It’s just the latest example of corporate America using design as a tool to maximize workers’ satisfaction and productivity. For years, forward-looking corners of corporate America have bucked conventional office norms, replacing traditional cubicles and sterile conference rooms with thoughtful spaces that reinforce human relationships and foster quality of workplace life.

Colleges and universities, on the other hand, have historically lagged behind corporate America in designing spaces for their constituents. Rather than focusing on the student experience, institutions of higher education have designed spaces with donors and administrators in mind. They’ve pursued designs that exude status and prestige rather than comfort, function, and equitable access.

Consider the value of design in corporate settings. According to the Fellowes Workplace Wellness Trend Report, nearly 90% of surveyed employees would like their employer to provide healthier workspaces, from sit-stand desks and ergonomic seating to wellness rooms.  These sorts of changes can directly impact employee satisfaction, morale, and productivity. Seventy percent of workers with access to natural light and views report improved performance, according to a survey from HR firm Future Workplace. And the companies are responding to such calls.

It’s smart for businesses to invest in these designs. If employees feel comfortable and content in their workplace, they enjoy their work and put in quality effort. They respond well to the respect their employers show them. The same can be expected of college students. If they feel valued and secure in their research libraries, lecture halls, cafes, and campus quads, they can focus more effectively on studying, look forward to learning, and thrive academically.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. Numerous companies, including tech leaders like Salesforce and Spotify, have changed everything from the furniture to the desk layouts to better promote collaboration. It’s just the latest example of corporate America using design as a tool to maximize workers’ satisfaction and productivity.
2. Colleges and universities, on the other hand, have historically lagged behind corporate America in designing spaces for their constituents. Rather than focusing on the student experience, institutions of higher education have designed spaces with donors and administrators in mind.
3. The power of design is real. Corporate America knows that. It’s time for colleges and universities discover the same to foster student success.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Design, Productivity

How Facebook and Google fund global misinformation

By Karen Hao | MIT Technology Review | November 20, 2021

In 2015, six of the 10 websites in Myanmar getting the most engagement on Facebook were from legitimate media. A year later, Facebook (which recently rebranded to Meta) offered global access to Instant Articles, a program publishers could use to monetize their content.  One year after that rollout, legitimate publishers accounted for only two of the top 10 publishers on Facebook in Myanmar. By 2018, they accounted for zero. All the engagement had instead gone to fake news and clickbait websites. In a country where Facebook is synonymous with the internet, the low-grade content overwhelmed other information sources.

It was during this rapid degradation of Myanmar’s digital environment that a militant group of Rohingya—a predominantly Muslim ethnic minority—attacked and killed a dozen members of the security forces, in August of 2017. As police and military began to crack down on the Rohingya and push out anti-Muslim propaganda, fake news articles capitalizing on the sentiment went viral. They claimed that Muslims were armed, that they were gathering in mobs 1,000 strong, that they were around the corner coming to kill you.

It’s still not clear today whether the fake news came primarily from political actors or from financially motivated ones. But either way, the sheer volume of fake news and clickbait acted like fuel on the flames of already dangerously high ethnic and religious tensions. It shifted public opinion and escalated the conflict, which ultimately led to the death of 10,000 Rohingya, by conservative estimates, and the displacement of 700,000 more.

In 2018, a United Nations investigation determined that the violence against the Rohingya constituted a genocide and that Facebook had played a “determining role” in the atrocities. Months later, Facebook admitted it hadn’t done enough “to help prevent our platform from being used to foment division and incite offline violence.”

Over the last few weeks, the revelations from the Facebook Papers, a collection of internal documents provided to Congress and a consortium of news organizations by whistleblower Frances Haugen, have reaffirmed what civil society groups have been saying for years: Facebook’s algorithmic amplification of inflammatory content, combined with its failure to prioritize content moderation outside the US and Europe, has fueled the spread of hate speech and misinformation, dangerously destabilizing countries around the world.

But there’s a crucial piece missing from the story. Facebook isn’t just amplifying misinformation.  The company is also funding it.  An MIT Technology Review investigation, based on expert interviews, data analyses, and documents that were not included in the Facebook Papers, has found that Facebook and Google are paying millions of ad dollars to bankroll clickbait actors, fueling the deterioration of information ecosystems around the world.

2 key takeaways from the article

1. Over the last few weeks, the revelations from the Facebook Papers, a collection of internal documents provided to Congress and a consortium of news organizations by whistleblower Frances Haugen, have reaffirmed what civil society groups have been saying for years: Facebook’s algorithmic amplification of inflammatory content, combined with its failure to prioritize content moderation outside the US and Europe, has fueled the spread of hate speech and misinformation, dangerously destabilizing countries around the world.
2. But there’s a crucial piece missing from the story. Facebook and Google aren’t just amplifying misinformation.  They are also funding it. 

Full Article

(Copyrights)

Topics:  Fake News, Technology

Leading & Managing Section

What Space Missions Can Teach Us About Remote Work

By Tanusree Jain and Louis Brennan | MIT Sloan Management Review | November 16, 2021

After almost two years of working from home, the writing is on the wall for office arrangements: Remote work in some permutation is here to stay.  But the home-work environment continues to be muddled with challenges.   We can draw on lessons from the typical space mission, which is representative of a physically disconnected work structure between the mission control and far-flung task-oriented teams.  While the dimensions and levels of hybridity within different functional units of a company may vary, there are three strategies from which all teams could benefit.  

1. Manufacture zeitgebers to build new rhythms.  Space missions typically involve extended periods of time spent in a confined physical setting. Although astronauts have hectic work schedules that keep them very busy, they have to adjust to alterations to their natural zeitgebers.  To deal with these disrupted zeitgebers, astronauts on space missions mark the passage of time by dining together, participating in group recreational activities, celebrating holidays, and interacting with their families via audio or video.
2. Plan for both structure and flexibility. Instead of having an agile environment with active physical and social interaction and plentiful open space, the remote environment is exemplified by extended periods of rigidity, both in a physical sense and a social sense.  This rigidity is characteristic of space missions. Astronauts respond to this condition by observing a set schedule and routines on weekdays, with greater flexibility on weekends. Time is also set aside for performing housekeeping duties. The goal is to create organization and consistency within the confines of a rigid environment.
3. Prioritize internal communication.  On space missions, distantly located personnel have felt abandoned and ignored and perceived a lack of empathy on the part of Mission Control in terms of comprehending the constraints and stressors of working remotely. In fact, it’s normal for remote personnel to be hypersensitive, and a typical human response is predictably exaggerated by the conditions of isolation and confinement. NASA learned from these incidents and built schedules that factor in regular communication and check-ins across teams while still allowing for flexibility in engagement and interaction.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. After almost two years of working from home, the writing is on the wall for office arrangements: Remote work in some permutation is here to stay.  
2. But the home-work environment continues to be muddled with challenges.   Meeting the inherent challenges of hybrid work, where colleagues must collaborate from different locations and are often in their personal living spaces, requires the development of new routines that support these environments.  
3. We can draw on lessons from the typical space mission, which is representative of a physically disconnected work structure between the mission control and far-flung task-oriented teams. Three strategies from which all teams could benefit are:  manufacture zeitgebers to build new rhythms, plan for both structure and flexibility, and prioritize internal communication.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  COVID-19, Remote work, Teams, Organizational Behavior

How To Navigate Feedback Conversations: Avoid These Common Mistakes

Kwame Christian | Forbes Magazine | Nov 21, 2021

A Cognitive Scientist at Seattle University, Therese Huston’s passion is straightforward, “I try to help smart people be smarter at work.”  According to Huston, few professionals are really trained on how to give feedback. That said, there are three common, yet avoidable, mistakes managers often make.

1. They don’t give feedback at all.  According to a recent report in Harvard Business Review, 21% of managers admit they don’t provide feedback. Huston recognizes that most managers want to be the “nice boss.” People rarely want to be the one who must give difficult feedback to a colleague or direct report.  
2. They don’t say their good intentions out loud.  Most leaders have good intentions when providing constructive feedback to their employees. The problem is, they assume the receiver knows that as well, which is rarely the case. Research suggests that when people receive bad news, they tend to shoot messenger. 
3. They lead with talking and not listening.  Huston recommends managers practice listening by first asking their employees for their perspective on the situation. Reports show that with this approach the receiver will regard you as much more effective at delivering feedback, despite your words remaining the same.

So, what does helpful feedback look like? According to Huston, these are the most important tips to remember:

1. Lead with listening, not talking.
2. Clarify your good intentions. (A simple statement like “I want good things for you” can go a long way).
3. Embrace a growth mindset.

On the other hand, if you are an employee looking to receive feedback from your manager, Huston has three helpful strategies for starting the conversation.

1. Make it easy for your manager.  Approach your manager with a list of three self-identified areas you would like to improve. Then ask which they would like you to prioritize. 
2. Ask for clarification on what a highly rated employee looks like.  If you’re at a company that rates employees, perhaps on a scale of 1-5, ask management, “What does a 5 look like?” This will give you clear insight into what improvements may get you to the next level.
3. Ask management if you are “promotion material”. The boldest strategy would be to directly ask your manager, “Am I promotion material?” If they say no, clarify what improvements would need to be made to become eligible for promotion. Give yourself and management a timeline for achieving this goal, then follow-up monthly to confirm you are on track.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. Few professionals are really trained on how to give feedback. 
2. There are three common, yet avoidable, mistakes managers often make: they don’t give feedback at all, they don’t say their good intentions out loud, and they lead with talking and not listening
3. So, what does helpful feedback look like? The three most important tips can be:  lead with listening, not talking, clarify your good intentions. (A simple statement like “I want good things for you” can go a long way), and embrace a growth mindset.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Communication, Feedback, Teams, Organizational Behavior

Entrepreneurship Section

6 Keys to Transforming Your Business From Dog-Eat-Dog to We-All-Win

By Martin Zwilling | Inc Magazine |  November 17, 2021

As the current supply chain problems illustrate, we are all interconnected, and can no longer run our businesses without consideration for all the other businesses and society.  According to the author as a business advisor, he still finds a pervasive dog-eat-dog and ‘me’ mentality, rather than a more collaborative shared responsibility to work together and improve all our futures, including business as well as health, environmental, and cultural. The author shared six key steps in moving your company to this new reality – an insight based on a recent book by Simon Mainwaring, a top 50 keynote speaker in the world.

1. Elevate the health and wellness of people and the planet first.  Customers are looking for a differentiator today. The evidence is clear that companies that help people in need, and the environment, are paid back in revenue by the rest of us.
2. Retool how your company works and operates today.  Many companies were slow in adopting pandemic-required adaptations. Some of these companies no longer exist. Practice your agility.  If you haven’t changed for several years the way you do common processes, like customer satisfaction surveys, lead generation, and marketing, it’s time to look at the new remote apps and social media platforms for more effective and relevant alternatives.
3. Re-purpose products and services for emergent needs.  Plan ahead to quickly and efficiently implement changes to your business processes in response to quality-of-life needs.  Such emergent needs can indeed become major opportunities for your business.
4. Partner in new ways to scale your impact.  Dog-eat-dog negotiations can easily come back to bite you. Leverage partnerships that you have built along the way, to adapt quickly when things suddenly change. When you treat people and companies right, you build social capital that allows you to call on other businesses when you need them most.
5. Innovate in real-time to protect your business.  Many companies today still eschew innovation in the ranks, and count on fixed ways of doing things to squeeze out costs. Innovating only after the crisis is too late and too slow today. Practice by fostering regular experiments, rewarding creativity, and training for brainstorming.
6. “Future proof” your business by thinking long-term.  Skip the shortcuts you may be taking to get an edge on your competitors at the expense of quality or customer service. Make sure every decision you implement is consistent with company values, your strategic direction, and customer loyalty.

3 key takeaways from the article

1. As the current supply chain problems illustrate, we are all interconnected, and can no longer run our businesses without consideration for all the other businesses and society.  
2. Nevertheless, a pervasive dog-eat-dog and ‘me’ mentality is prevailing rather than a more collaborative shared responsibility to work together and improve all our futures.
3. Six key steps in moving your company to this new reality are: elevate health and wellness of people and the planet first, retool how your company works and operates today, re-purpose products and services for emergent needs, partner in new ways to scale your impact, innovate in real-time to protect your business, and “future proof” your business by thinking long-term.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Entrepreneurship, Collaboration, Teams

5 Ways Entrepreneurs Can Shape the Future of Social Media

By Aaron Greenberg | Entrepreneur | November 24, 2021

Surveying the last few years, it might seem like a bad time to get involved in social media. Twitter and Facebook are behemoths of American business, but their reputations are in ruins, humbled by whistleblowers and other scandals, for instance. 

But, as Winston Churchill advises, “Never let a good crisis go to waste”, and the current upheavals in social media have generated a range of opportunities for those with a keen eye. It’s far too early to write Zuckerberg off, but it’s also time to consider brighter opportunities on the horizon. People are fed up, standing up and seeking better ways to connect, socialize, collaborate and share experiences — a frontier has opened with unprecedented paths for entrepreneurs to embrace and innovate social technologies and who are poised to bootstrap Web 3.0.  But how to best use your skills and values to create a space that respects the privacy, dignity and creativity of the people who visit it?  Five suggestions:

1. Champion the rights of creators and consumers.  Smart entrepreneurs should anticipate a future where organic engagement through reciprocal, value-added services and shared experiences replaces “targeting” and “tracking” — where users are community members rather than exploitable assets.
2. Decentralize.  More than a buzzword, decentralization will help you make good on a promise to champion the rights of consumers and creators. For starters, content creators should own the material they publish on social technology platforms, and earn compensation when it’s profitable.
3. Opting in instead of out.  People must understand how your service works, and should be empowered to shape their experience of it for themselves. Tricking someone into agreeing to something they haven’t fully understood is shortsighted. Respecting people’s intelligence and autonomy isn’t just right, it’s also good business. The next generation of social technology companies ought to let users define their experience and online communities.
4. Cultivate community.  Why do people come to social media in the first place? No one wants to argue with their uncle about whether the election was stolen or if vaccines are safe. They came for a basic human reason: to connect. Instead, they find bitterness and division.  Next-generation social technology platforms should design around human values to create the conditions for real communities to thrive. 
5. Keep it simple.  

3 key takeaways from the article

1. Surveying the last few years, it might seem like a bad time to get involved in social media. Twitter and Facebook are behemoths of American business, but their reputations are in ruins, humbled by whistleblowers and other scandals, for instance.
2. People are fed up, standing up and seeking better ways to connect, socialize, collaborate and share experiences — a frontier has opened with unprecedented paths for entrepreneurs to embrace and innovate social technologies and who are poised to bootstrap Web 3.0.
3. Five suggestions for the new generation of entrepreneurs testing water in social media are: champion the rights of creators and consumers, decentralize, opting in instead of out, cultivate community, and keep it simple.

Full Article

(Copyright)

Topics:  Social Media, Regulators, Entrepreneurs