Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

Craig, I think you make a good point about the seduction of technology and the allure of new gadgets and software. (I`m in the choir section on this topic -- I don`t have a food processor or a salad spinner ... I own a knife and a collander. I`m also one of the only people on my block who had phone service when there was an extensive power outage after a hurricane, because I still have an "attached to the wall" corded phone.)

There are other venues for this online collaboration task. They`re available for our use at other web sites, if we can`t get it here. I`m aware of at least two that come highly recommended. Do you have other ideas for a creative solution or were you just posing the question?

Eureka! (maybe)

This not be the ideal solution, but it has possibilities. This is to address the issue of wanting to share information in a collaborative effort, but not having to set up a venue at another site. Rather than trying to describe the concept, let me just give an example:

CraigL has suggested a few starting ideas of services that new businesses want. Ones that could be performed by our soon-to-be-established Tiger Teams. Instead of leaving it buried in the main thread of this project, CraigL would take this list and create a new forum topic (something like "Tiger Team - List of Potential Services"). Other people could read the list, suggest their own additions, have discussions -- all the usual things that occur in the forum settings. But then CraigL would edit his initial posting (the list) to incorporate additional suggestions, weed out items that we deem to be undesirable, and possibly rearrange things on the list. The rearranging part would allow for putting the highest priorities on top, but keeping other viable ideas on the back burner to possibly revisit later.

By having the list posted first, you could easily see the most current revision on the first page of the forum topic. By putting one person in charge of the updates and the moderation of the subsequent discussions, that person will have ownership of that particular process, and we can have a division of labor. That way, a person can oversee a task in which they have interest and/or expertise, we will get a mix of development styles, there will be more equity in the participation, and the same people who tend to jump in and take the lead when they see something that needs to be done won`t be doing it all.

A couple other issues about this method of sharing. We will need to title our subtask forums with a consistent naming system, so they can easily be identified. We might use the phrase Tiger Team first, followed by the subject (e.g., "Tiger Team - Participating Members", "Tiger Team - Roles Available to Be Filled", "Tiger Team - Upcoming Conference Call Schedule"). We should also get a general consensus before starting each of these subtask forums to keep a connecting reference within this thread, and to avoid a barrage of subtask forums for every whim.

One drawback to this "make do" system is that our discussions are all on public display; but based on the minimal participation that I`ve observed once we moved beyond the "let`s talk about it" stage, it makes me think that this won`t be a real problem. Inertia seems to be a stronger force than someone taking our work and ideas and turning them into a business of their own.

Another drawback is that this format has limitations. For example, my checklist  for each person to use to assess their level of expertise in the roles they`d like to serve won`t easily work in this format. But we may be able to come up with some other creative alternatives for that process as well. Just mentioning it while I`m thinking about it.

Ok, now tell me what other drawbacks I`ve overlooked or suggest an alternative that we might use. Remember, I`m thinking "low-tech" and "go-with-what-we`ve-got". But other creative ideas are welcome.

LOL!! :-) First of all, I have no problem editing a post to include a growing list. That`s fine with me, makes sense, and would work. That being said, my initial list was off the top of my head! It was just some things that stuck in my mind from reading the boards over the past month or so.

How come nobody`s added to that list? ;-) Hell, we could do it right here on this thread. I`d take those problems others see, and add them.

Denise, I know Steven has indicated to you the Wiki he`s started. The only problem at this moment is that it`s not so easy to add your name as a participant. It requires reading the help from the wiki software site, and a general understanding of how "code symbols" work, like in HTML and other online text processors.

The more I`m looking at this "Tiger Team" idea, next to the "e-learning" idea, and regardless that they were split as two possible business lines, I think they`re the same thing.

Here`s another research project for anyone who`s up for it. What online collaborative solutions currently exist? Scate`s "Ignite" is excellent for online presentations, but what about collaborative meeting software? How much does it cost, and where would we get the money to subscribe?

A Wiki is an excellent way to collaborate, but it does require a nominal investment in learning those formatting codes. That, on the other hand, isn`t the same as a cash investment.

Finally; can we come up with a way to connect a "knowledge product" with those who have "hard goods" products?

 good point CraigL

And at the same time Hello  to every one!

 

    Maybe a joint venture? My great brainstorm was to choose an e-learning domain and create an entrepreneurial pro resource site, complete with an Internet2/Web2.0 focus on products and services. Ignite promises to be a great tool for content creation. That`s great. I wonder though, based on the cataegories on the main thread, could TigerTeams help create a list of the educational and multimedia resource tools and products to help startups reach their goals quicker? The thing I keep wanting to ask is, can Net2Mind be your first team project?

NYC696 at letter (d) says "The business value, is the repeatable process that allows a prospect with a need to be matched with resources" What better way to facillitate that process, than to offer product resources at a website and also charge a fee for a packaged service. So far the main items: Ignite Content, Website Design, There`a need for equity management, and a TigerTeam`s resource package for solving problems?? The main point is that businesses could click on and access (your) services. Could our project teams combine to create a business Together? Can we choose a domain name and create a product and service rich website Together?

In case you do wish to merge, how about the potential services resource package and equity management be discussed on this thread, allowing Mike`s Ignite leadership on the other? Can you say "Educational Resource Products" Can you say "Lifetime Residual Income" ? Once all project leaders are on board, CG has suggested an off sun private forum where we could `power chat` by invitation only.

Craig, you`re right about the difficulty of use is a major drawback. In my Q&D research prior to setting up the wiki you looked at, I saw references to wiki sites that used WSIWYG editors to eliminate the codes - in fact, the PBWiki looks as though it has that feature coming. But that doesn`t necessarily mean the learning curve is eliminated.

There`s still the need to figure out how wikis are structured, and the multiple ways in which one can participate ranging from creating a new `main` page, editing an existing page, and contributing comments to a discussion based on a given page. A couple of years from now the wiki paradigm will be so pervasive that a new group probably won`t think twice about collaborating via a group wiki. But for now, would we exclude people we wouldn`t want to by going that route?

Steven

Kathy, sounds good, and parallels discussion going on in Project#1 thread.

Downloads could made available alongside the free content, with the a service like PayPal used to collect the revenue.

I`m going to be the odd person out. (Like THAT`S never happened before.)

I would like to see the Tiger Team concept kept separate from the E-Learning Business. I see these two concepts as being different entities. There may be some overlap, but I don`t think they`re the same thing.

One of the things I really like about the Tiger Team idea is the "smallness" of it. The E-Learning group says "big" to me. By combining the two, we will lose the opportunity to compare different approaches in online business development.

Could we develop this concept a little further before conceding a leveraged merger?

Denise, I appreciate your perspective- especially your sense of the big vs small. Do you mean that in the sense of the target market to be served, or the size of the business organization, or ...?

I do think it is too soon to make a merger decision; my `second` (offered in the Project#1 thread) was made in the spirit of parlimentary procedure, as in, `the proposal has sufficient merit to warrant discussion without presumption of approval`.

Would you feel differently if the proposal didn`t speak of `merging` but instead of `sequencing`? That is, focusing on Project 1 until some (as yet unspecified) milestone were reached, then resurrecting Project 2?

Steven

I`m going to (manually ) paste this post into the threads of each of the three projects:

Should we have a common `Collaboration Tools Research` topic?

It seems as though each of the project teams is facing this dilemma, and I agree with CraigL who suggested it would be a useful research topic.

The topic list is our community commons, so I did not want to clutter it without first soliciting feedback.

Steven