Excellent point Kevin. Audience is key and influences intention greatly. Often I see discussions about directory listings focusing on out of town folks, and thus amenities and price points. Instead I believe we should focus on an audience that knows what coworking is and wants to know which spaces close to them associate with coworking and how to get in touch with them. If we can build a platform that provides this we can do all sorts of things with it. For example we'll have a way to quickly assess how things are going around the world and we'll have a rallying point much like we have around the word coworking itself. The out of town folks can still use this to find places to work and with an open API there can be sites that specifically cater to their needs.
Jacob --- Office Nomads - Individuality without Isolation http://www.officenomads.com - (206) 323-6500 On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Kevin Porter <kevinporter...@gmail.com>wrote: > I've heard an argument that the English language is one of the most > difficult to learn, although also very expressive, because the first > dictionary was created before the language had time to settle into > regular and natural expressions and patterns. The argument goes that > the English borrowed words from Latin and French (conception, appeal) > German (Kind, Garden) and others as well. > > When these words were written down, their original roots, spellings, > even pronunciation to some extent, remained. So what does this have > to do with coworking? > > I read in Alex's slides an excellent expression of customers/audience/ > market. So I thought, who is the audience for this site? > > Local folks will hopefully have learned about the space through > community focused means - local talk, friends, etc. and ideally will > do some research, go to the website, ask around, build a strong, > lasting, community-based relationship. > > If the audience for this particular site is out of town people, it > seems like they need to know 1. does this location allow drop-ins 2. > at what cost (or exchange network) and three - what else do I need to > know... > > Maybe that last point is where the discussion is focused - What I need > to know for one space ("Call ahead and reserve, we only have one desk > available, but we're happy to hold it for you if you let us know" is > different than "Park in back of the Jelly Donut shop next door - we > have an agreement with them." Maybe a comment field is helpful there? > > Hope this is of value - very interesting discussion by the way! > > Best, > > Kevin > > > On Mar 1, 7:19 am, Alex Hillman <dangerouslyawes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > clear vision communicated > > > > > That's a good idea - This could be expressed in a few sentences or > perhaps > > > a tag cloud, but tags probably arent enough... Does it make sense for > each > > > space to have a 'vision' / mission / purpose field? > > > > Perhaps that'd help! > > > > > > comparing the wrong attributes > > > > > What are the right attributes? Are there /any/ worth quantifying? > > > > The best way I can say "no" to this is when we recently had some > University > > of Pennsylvania students have someone recommend they come and work from > Indy > > Hall over their winter break while the library was closed. They were > > students so I offered them a severe cut-rate membership for a couple of > > months in return for some feedback on how we could communicate better > with > > students. > > > > He said, "I'm so glad you gave me a chance to see and feel this for > myself - > > I'd read through your website and just from the language felt like I'd be > > comfortable there, but you couldn't have described this place and what it > > feels like in writing. It's an experience worth having." > > > > I think its important to break DOWN expectations in order to get the most > > from a coworking space. When people come in with pre-set expectations, > they > > only "use" the space like they expect they're supposed to. We do a lot of > > carefully nuanced things to make people second-guess their expectations, > and > > have found that it makes them more susceptible to the less usual > > interactions around them having a lasting impact. > > > > > I totally get you on how over-definition results in killing the > subtlety > > > and nuance that makes coworking special to use. That nuance comes > through > > > in people's web sites, which is why one of the first features I added > to > > > coreg was a screenshot of their website, but that could perhaps be > bigger on > > > the profiles page. Photos help a lot too, to communicate personality > and > > > character. > > > > See above. Even on our OWN website, which we control completely, we > missed > > the mark. In our next redesign, I want to address this not by adding > more, > > but by taking things away. > > > > > One of the other purposes (audiences) that I was hoping this site would > > > have is that of governments, where the site could serve to provide > metrics > > > for local/regional/state/national groups interested in coworking, to > support > > > the cause and show people the real value using numbers as opposed to > the > > > more ephemeral attributes that we're talking about here. > > > > To what end? *Sounds* great but most governments and coworking space > > owners/operators/founders won't have a clue what to do with these > "metrics" > > other than throw them at the EDCs and, well, I've already written about > > that: > > > > http://dangerouslyawesome.com/2010/12/on-economic-development-centers... > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jonathan > > > > > On 3/1/11 9:01 AM, Alex Hillman wrote: > > > > > My fundamental break with a directory structure is it becomes a > distraction > > > for people running and interested in space for what attributes that > actually > > > get members past "in the door". > > > > > It's the equivalent to Susan's "Stop marketing your Stuff" post, on a > > > broader scale. It's not that marketing stuff doesn't work to get them > in the > > > door, its that its a distraction from doing things that are long term > > > valuable and will do things like get members talking about great > experiences > > > they've had, and ultimately make them contributing members of your > > > mini-societies. > > > > > For spaces, it encourages focus on the wrong things: "oh, my desks are > > > nicer than theirs" "oh, my price points are better" etc. All useless > tweaks > > > to your business model if you don't have a clear vision communicated > for you > > > community and your space. > > > > > For members and member-potentials, it has them comparing the wrong > > > attributes of a coworking space and puts everyone in the directory in a > > > "lowest common denominator" arrangement, which I refuse to allow our > > > community and workspace to be included in. Lowest Common Denominator is > good > > > for nobody. > > > > > -Alex > > > > > /ah > > > indyhall.org > > > coworking in philadelphia > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Jonathan Yankovich < > > > jonathan.yankov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> Here's a conversation Jacob and I had about how to measure coworking, > > >> cross posted for the benefit of others: > > > > >> (You can join this conversation by adding > coworkingregis...@ourconf.orgto your Gmail contacts list (works with Gmail > Chat only, not Google Apps > > >> Chat)) > > > > >> *coworkingregis...@ourconf.com* Daily Chat Activity > > >> for Tuesday, March 1, 2011 (3/1/11) (coworkingregis...@ourconf.com): > > >> 12:03 jsayles: Jonathan, are you there this AM? 12:03 jonathan: > yessah > > >> 12:04 jsayles: Are we annoying you with this thread on the google > group? > > >> 12:04 jonathan: No, not at all 12:04 jsayles: does it make sense > what I > > >> was getting at? 12:04 jonathan: I havent had time to really dig into > > >> it.. I saw that you said something to the effect of "dont standardize, > > >> you'll kill it" 12:05 jsayles: yeah actually… that is a pretty > good > > >> paraphrase 12:05 jsayles: it's all about scope…. anything that is > > >> going to be central to such a wide audience must also be limited in > scope > > >> 12:06 jsayles: jeannine said it really well too 12:07 jonathan: Just > > >> read the thread 12:07 jonathan: I agree 12:07 jonathan: Did you > see > > >> the screenshot of the "grid display" for a city's coworking spaces? > > >> 12:07 jsayles: not yet… my inbox is rather overflowing since it's > > >> monday 12:08 jsayles: I put my email down on the weekends 12:08 > jsayles: > > >> took a special exception to respond to yoru email yesterday 12:12 > jonathan: > > >> I think if you see the grid you'll get what i'm getting at… when we > start > > >> comparing facilities, what do we compare them on? 12:12 jsayles: > Yes, I > > >> see that 12:12 jonathan: Maybe tag lists…? I was hoping to do > > >> membership levels, but if thats not what the communtiy wants, that > makes > > >> sense 12:12 jsayles: I think it's just trying to do too much 12:12 > jonathan: > > >> maybe drop-in rate at least? 12:12 jonathan: Check out the fields > list > > >> at 12:12 jonathan: sec 12:13 jsayles: I don't think that's > necessary > > >> 12:13 jsayles: Especially for this first round where we are trying to > get > > >> adoption, the main thing it needs to do is say "Office Nomads exists > in > > >> Seattle at this spot on the map" 12:14 jsayles: then let my website > > >> talk about what Office Nomads is all about 12:14 jonathan: I'd like > > >> more detail than that 12:14 jonathan: I'd like to see ways to > compare > > >> or see facilities in context 12:14 jsayles: yes, but at the expense > of > > >> being a solution many people opt out of? 12:15 jonathan: I dont > think > > >> that needs to be the case 12:16 jsayles: I don't know how better to > > >> explain myself via email or chatting 12:16 jonathan: Or, if we're > > >> focusing on personality/culture, then how does that data look? how can > that > > >> be 'standardized' 12:16 jonathan: Agree, its a fine line 12:17 > jonathan: > > >> but that doesnt mean it should be ignored or disqualified 12:17 > jsayles: > > >> In short it can't. The real question is how can software be useful > without > > >> standardization 12:17 jonathan: mmmm disagree 12:17 jsayles: oh > this > > >> is a much bigger conversation then 12:17 jonathan: I dont think we > know > > >> enough, or at least I don't, at this point to say "it cant" 12:17 > jonathan: > > >> Check out this list of fields that was passed around the list a few > months > > >> ago: > > >>https://spreadsheets4.google.com/ccc?authkey=CPaA9bgH&hl=en&key=thoPm. > .. > > >> 12:18 jonathan: There are some metrics, like square footage, number of > > >> members which would be verrry interesting to collect 12:18 jsayles: > Oh > > >> don't get me wrong, I love numbers 12:19 jsayles: I'd strongly > advise > > >> against it 12:19 jsayles: against this whole way of coming at the > > >> problem 12:20 jonathan: Hmm, i guess i'm a little confused then… > > >> 12:20 jsayles: It seems you are getting lost in all the things the > > >> software could do if everyone just conformed…. 12:20 jonathan: One > of > > >> the big shortfalls of the wiki is that the data arent structured, so > I'm > > >> hoping to provide more structure.. as this field emerges, > standardization > > >> will start to happen, no? 12:21 jsayles: yes… in part 12:21 > jonathan: > > >> I'm saying that there are certain things that are common, like "Free > Parking > > >> Available" - I'd like to define those things 12:21 jsayles: a few > > >> points to consider… are we going to figure out what the standard is > going > > >> to be or develop a solution that allows it to emerge organically? > 12:22 jsayles: > > >> that reduced spaces down to amenity points…. 12:22 jonathan: If > > >> that's all the data that are provided, then yes, but we have an > opportunity > > >> to provide other information 12:22 jsayles: it's really > unnecessary…. > > >> 12:22 jonathan: like reviews, testimonials, etc 12:23 jsayles: I > can > > >> see that working 12:23 jonathan: i may agree with you there, im not > > >> clear on the necessity of ameneties lists 12:23 jsayles: OK, let's > back > > >> up 12:24 jonathan: I think it might be helpful to look at it from > use > > >> cases too… Lets say I'm in a given city for a day, I'd like to know > where > > >> are the spaces, who accepts drop-ins, who has parking, what are their > hours, > > >> etc 12:24 jonathan: Do the focus on writers, developers, etc > (culture) > > >> 12:24 jsayles: I disagree 12:24 jonathan: You dont think using use > > >> cases / user stories is a good way to determine what the site should > do? > > >> 12:24 jsayles: That is the way every other listing site comes at the > > >> problem and it's a "problem" that doesn't need to be solved 12:25 > jsayles: > > >> no, I don't think that use case is valid 12:25 jonathan: okay > 12:25 jsayles: > > >> People want to know where the coworking spaces are 12:25 jsayles: > The > > >> fact that Office Nomads associates with "coworking" and that we are at > this > > >> given address and have this website is all that is needed for > > > > ... > > > > read more » > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Coworking" group. > To post to this group, send email to coworking@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group. To post to this group, send email to coworking@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to coworking+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en.
