I just finished C.K. Prahalad‘s latest book, The New Age of Innovation. Prahalad’s strategy writings are fairly standard M.B.A. reading (I consumed my share back in 2001), but none of his previous works resonated so deeply with me as this one.
While Prahalad discusses many ideas in this book, one of his key concepts is that companies need to stop focusing on commodity-based transactions with customers and start offering experiences. For Prahalad, value creation comes from personalized experiences, not products or product-based transactions.
This sets the stage for his two core points: (1) the individual is at the heart of the experience, and (2) companies can no longer control/own all of the resources necessary to provide personalized experiences.
So, if creating personalized experiences is the new direction, and individual companies cannot provide the resources required for creating personalized experiences, what’s the answer?
For Prahalad, a significant part of the answer is consumers themselves. Here are some excerpts from his book:
- “Customers play an active role in co-creating value.”
- “Customers are increasingly a source of competence.”
- “…a whole generation of consumers [will be] expecting to be treated as unique individuals, and they now have the skills and the propensity to engage in a marketplace defined by [personalized experiences].”
What does this have to do with entertainment? Well, Prahalad gives various examples of how existing companies can overhaul themselves to fall in line with his two core concepts, he never really ventures into the entertainment industry. That’s a shame, since I think the entertainment industry has a wonderful opportunity to explore new ways to brings its audiences deeper into the content creation process. I believe this opportunity has so much potential that I co-founded Brain Candy, LLC based on this philosophy.
Brain Candy builds customized models of content creation where fans can participate canonically and monetarily in commercial entertainment properties without forcing property owners to sacrifice quality or commercial control [to be clear, Brain Candy’s work focuses on commercial entertainment properties that incorporate user-generated content as official works; it’s not crowd-sourcing or an open-source approach to content creation].
But back to Prahalad. His book eloquently lays out – from a business perspective – the rationale for why content creators should consider a collaborative approach in some circumstances. If consumers are capable of co-creating value with property owners and are a source of competence, why not find new models of entertainment that include consumers, audiences, and fans as part of the process? Why can’t personalized experiences and individual creativity be integrated into collaborative commercial entertainment?
The list of reasons against letting fans into the creative process is long and legion: It’s a legal nightmare. It will dilute the quality of the property. It can’t be sustained monetarily. It can’t scale. It won’t support world continuity.
I’m not suggesting that collaborative entertainment is easy, but I am adamant that it’s possible. Indeed, I’m adamant that it’s viable.
I’m not suggesting that collaborative entertainment is the silver bullet for Hollywood. In fact, it’s not ideal for every genre, much less every property. At this time, it’s especially suited for two genres that are already awash with avid fans and a mountain of user-generated content: fantasy and science fiction.
And I’m not suggesting that collaborative entertainment is going to replace entertainment as we know it. It’s an additive alternative, not a wholesale substitute.
What I am suggesting is that Hollywood might find a new way to view how content can be created and entertainment properties can be generated in ways that reward audiences and benefit property owners. And Prahalad’s The New Age of Innovation is a great starting point for understanding why this is important.
Thank you, Scott!!! This is my belief also; so much so, that I’m currently pursing my dissertation research in this area, by studying independent produsers – Axel Bruns’ term – who are trying to transition to making these works their primary source of income. All of my participants are working with sci-fi/geek culture properties, in many forms, from independent “gray market” unlicensed products, through guild-type cooperatives to handle legal and marketing issues, all the way to those who have managed to find a happy arrangement making canonical and licensed works.
I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to talk with you in more depth about Brain Candy and about these new models of entertainment production!
Regards,
Sue Regonini
Ph.D. Candidate, Applied Anthropology
University of South Florida
And I’d like to learn more about your research! Please call/email me at your convenience.
Oh, and I checked out the outtotheblack site and couldn’t stop laughing. I literally just watched the “Done the Impossible” documentary last night, and I immediately thought of the scene where a fan reenacts Wash’s toy dinosaur scene in the cockpit. Never met a Browncoat I didn’t like…
I believe wholeheartedly in viable production models for crowd-influenced fare. On the other hand, the reason why so many filmmakers embark on their unlikely journey to success in the visual storytelling industry is to share their unique creative voice; and the less money you have, the more passion, commitment and determination is needed to supplement the financial disparity.
Crowd-influenced filmmaking is another animal in that it requires a different kind of filmmaker; a producer far less concerned about Artistic expression and far more concerned about business and commerce. I say this because filmmakers face adversity and the near certainty of failure on so many levels every day and wouldn’t do it any differently if given the choice (albeit on a larger scale).
At the end of the day there will be those in the business for its business potential and true Auteurs and I find myself smack dab in between. I can go either way–and the way I go largely depends on the project at hand (or at the hands of others).
Thanks for sharing!
[Miles Maker is a story Author, content Producer and Auteur whose dynamic media ventures encompass three current web/tech sector megatrends: mobile, social, and real-time.]
Miles,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this from a filmmaking perspective!
I think your “the way I go largely depends on the project at hand” comment is both astute and indicative of why things like content/experience creation in a digital world and trans/cross-media often generate conflicting views and observations.
There are so many moving parts, so many things to consider these days beyond just the creation of the content/experience (e.g., online/social media, trans/cross-media extensions, crowdsourcing/funding, digital distribution, etc.) that finding a general rule to follow for every project is impossible.
What you create and how you go about it should always be driven by the nature of your project and your goals.
Scott,
A great post. I couldn’t agree more that finding ways for the audience to co-create is viable. But the resistance is huge.
In honour of social media week, I ran Crushing It (http://crushingitstory.com) — a live comedy soap opera on Twitter. We were able to establish a truly intimate relationship with the audience, by giving them lots of opportunities to influence both the behaviour of individual characters and of the plotline. In fact, we used the tagline “the end is up to you” because we did not write an ending in advance but waited to see which way the audience wanted us to take it.
The project was enormously satisfying for the creators and for the audience as well.
For the entertainment industry, these are truly exciting times. Audiences are in for richer, deeper, more intimate entertainment experiences. And these will no doubt provide new marketing solutions and new outlets for creative thinkers — if everyone can just get over their fear.
Jill,
Many thanks for taking the time to post here!
I’m resisting the urge to quote a television show regarding your comment about resistance. It was a science fiction show. About a trek. In the stars. And one of the characters said that resistance is, you know futile. Damn it (sigh).
Yes, resistance within large media companies against this kind of thing is monumental. But it won’t last forever. You already know that, or you wouldn’t be doing the kinds of projects like, “Crushing It.”
By the way, much love for publishing “Crushing It” under a Creative Commons license. Much love, indeed (by the way, what do you mean when you say you’ll ‘open source’ the creative development?).
I really enjoyed reading your post about how “Crushing It” came about – can you share some thoughts about the project now that you’re on the other side of “it’s over?”
Thanks for the support from up north, and keep it collaborative!