New Year is a great time to look forward and to anticipate and prepare for what is to come.  So I thought I would use this blog to discuss a few important trends that I believe will impact the way we do business in the future.  This originated from a question asked of me on a fellowship application: “What do you think are the 3 most important trends affecting business, technology & communications?”  Below is my response.

1. Emergence of “Individual” Corporate Identity

As social media give companies an opportunity to step closer to their end customers, this new strategy also puts individual faces onto what used to be a collective corporate identity.  Two cases in point: Peter Cashmore for Mashable, Scott Monty for Ford, to name just a few.  While such corporate spokespersons have existed before, now they have a much more personal face that interact with consumers day in and day out. This new corporate “individual” identity can have important implications for corporate branding and even companies’ hiring practices.

2. Mobilization of communication via geo-enabled services and mobile devices

Foursquare, need I say more?  Undoubtedly this represents great business opportunities for many companies. But more than that, this finally arriving mobile market is going to create new consumer privacy concerns and will require new types of policy to regulate how consumers’ geographic information can be used and protected.  Coupled with the buzz on real-time search and interaction, business practice and public policy in this area can be complicated.

3. Real-time verbal and textual translation

Google recently added a real-time translation service that can be integrated into an online chat session or used via its new Google Wave service.  When the precision of this type of services improves, its impact on cross-cultural communication will be tremendous. With the help of the Internet and social media, individuals already collaborate in many areas such as R&D, open source applications, and cause advocacy.  Now only imagine magnifying this many times to a global scale.

In the spirit of this blog, I’d also like to refer my interested readers to the predictions made by a few other web and social media experts:

• Social media prediction for 2010 by Scott Monty (Ford social media expert)
• Trendspotting’s expert trend predictions in 140 characters
• Social marketing trends from reviewing 2009 by web strategist Jeremiah Owyang

What about you?  What do you expect to see in 2010? Whether you agree or disagree with all these predictions, I hope everyone has a happy and productive year!

Blogging for over a year has been a great learning experience for me.  What I have learned has prompted me to think more about what I can write that will provide the best value to my readers.  After devoting much thought to the question, I decided that filling the gap between the academia and marketing practice will be the best area to focus on, and hence the new subtitle “Bridging the Gap Between Academia and Marketing Practice”.  This subtitle reflects the new direction that Ping! will take in the future.  What I intend to do is to discuss cutting-edge marketing and psychology research and its implications for marketing practice, and at the same time bring new trends, questions, and thinking from the practical world back into the academia. Being a marketing academic who also frequently interacts with the industry, I feel particularly compelled and passionate to fulfill this role.

You might be wondering why I am passionate about this.  To list just a few of my reasons:

• Few academic marketing journals are read by anyone other than academics themselves, so much so that some academic researchers joke that we write for ourselves.  Why is this the case? It has a lot to do with the way we write in the academia and our insufficient discussion of how our research can be applied to business practice.
• Another contributing factor is the poor publicity that academic marketing journals receive. This is somewhat ironic, and has a lot to do with the lack of funding by many journals to publicize their research.
• In today’s quickly changing business environment, the academia has sometimes trailed behind in terms of what we are studying and practicing. A case in point: the only academic marketing journal that uses Twitter is the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (@JAMS_updates), and even that is to broadcast to the world rather than building a dialogue (it is not following anyone).

The end result of all this is that we academics limit the impact of our hard work and at the same time may spend time on things that are not the most important/relevant to practice.  My intention therefore is to discuss some excellent research that is especially relevant for business, and how a company can apply the findings to improve their marketing practice.  From time to time, I will also talk about business issues that need more academic research on.

With this shift in focus, Ping! will post a new entry every one to two weeks, and each entry will appear on Monday or Tuesday of the week.  Here’s a preview of what is coming up in Ping!:

• Why companies experiment with Second Life and what they have learned
• Research on automaticity and what it means to marketers
• Consumption and sharing of user-generated content

What do you think?  Please feel free to share your thoughts.  If you are a marketing practitioner and would like to see an issue discussed or researched, please feel free to share them here or drop me a note.

Partly due to celebrity involvement, Twitter has quickly gained popularity in the last few months. According to eMarketer, various online metrics firms reported an approximately ten-fold increase in unique Twitter visitors from February 2008 to February 2009. With the rise in popularity, news broke out that quite a few major firms, including Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Newscorp, are eyeing to buy out Twitter.

Should Twitter sell out when it is still hot? My answer to this question is no. Here’s why. Twitter, just as Wikipedia and Facebook, didn’t start out as a major corporation. Rather, it is built over time through the participation and faith of its users. What makes Twitter precious in consumers’ mind is the community that it has created. The value of the Twitter brand name is not in the company itself, but in all the people who contribute fantastic and interesting content on the fly and in the way it is able to connect people with each other. Now adding a suit and tie image and a clear profit motive that is usually associated with large corporations, it will simply clash with Twitter’s current brand image and turn off the goodwill it has engendered among its users. Twitter from Microsoft (or Google or News Corp.) just doesn’t sound right.

One might argue that YouTube got bought out by Google and it is still popular. But that acquisition has yet to prove beneficial to Google money-wise. It is estimated that YouTube will lose $470 million in 2009, on sales of $240 million. Plus, it is also facing pressure from Hulu.com, another video website that has successfully struck business deals with major networks recently, including a stake taken by Discovery. Piecing these events together, the future of YouTube is quite uncertain.

Of course, Twitter is going to face the same question too in terms of how it is going to support itself financially if it were to remain independent. To answer that question, one has to look at the value and competency that Twitter possesses. At least two areas emerge. One is information. By millions of people feeding news, facts, and opinions into Twitter in real-time, Twitter has become an information network that is no less powerful than a major news network. This can be powerful knowledge to news organizations (for breaking news), marketers (for customer opinions) and the like. One way for Twitter to make money in this area is perhaps to develop as an information expert, helping these potential beneficiaries extract and analyze the useful data. For example, a platform can be established to combine tweets with Twitter traffic information to better understand what is on the collective mind. A second area that Twitter can explore is its technology expertise. Using the basic Twitter platform, it can develop customized platforms that satisfy companies’ internal messaging needs, similar to what Yammer is doing but perhaps in a more proprietary and customized fashion. Such customized platforms can facilitate efficient and secure communication within an organization (e.g., between salespeople).

Of course, the smart minds at Twitter might think of other ways of making money. But whichever way it ends up making money, I simply do not think it is a good idea for Twitter to sell to any of these large corporations. And the company seems to agree, when Twitter’s co-founder Biz Stone said “We Are Not For Sale”.