I mean I may tell you that I mean I am an analytics person, I’m a data analyst, I’m a data scientist, I have backgrounds in so on and so forth, but I can’t tell you everything that I know. I mean do you–I may be–maybe I know a particular knowledge.

I know like for example, I know neuroscience and very few people in the social industry knows about this because my PhD is actually neuroscience and maybe in some areas that requires some knowledge of how the human brain works and if I don’t explicitly declare that sometimes it’s very hard for people to find out that I have that skill, but making the problem visible to me, I’ll say, that’s an obvious problem. I know how to solve that because I know what I know.

Other people don’t know what I know, but making the problem explicit and visible to everybody, you have many more pairs of eyes to look at the problem and giving everybody a chance to say that, whether there’s something that I can do or I cannot do, so you essentially tackle a bigger problem and you find the skill necessary to tackle this problem faster and easier. I think that’s one of the big, big difference.

So, one of the things of our customer collaboration is that they are not obligated to work with them. So, I think that the one of the challenge right now in social software is adoption. I mean assuming that the software does what it’s supposed–what it promised and people still need to use it and adopt it before the organization can realize it’s value.

I mean clearly every company have every software–every social software claims certain things. Your productivity will boost, you will like reduce your time to solution and self-cycle and give an element of self-cycle and all that. If the software does everything it does, everything it promised, there’s still one caveat: People still need to use it. If no one use it then–no one likes to use the software then you’re back to square one, you’re back to zero again then you don’t realize any of the promise that the software give you.

So, I think the same thing is with external collaboration. You have this great platform if the social customers out there are not collaborating, not willing to collaborate with you then you’re out of luck. So, one of the ways that we can try collaboration with customer externally is through–we’ve seen that over and over again, platform is through gamification.

So, gamification is essentially the use of game mechanics and game dynamics to drive a game-like engagement in behavior and when people play games, they’re very engaged, they pay attention, they have a lot of fun and they continue to play, so these are the kind of game-like engagement and behavior that we want to drive, so we want to drive them to continue to engage and collaborate with a company. So, I think gamification will be a huge part of a lot of company’s initiative if they are interested in collaborating with an external customer.

I think this actually works internally, too, because if you can drive people to adopt a software then assuming that the software works then you’d realize the value and then people will start using it once they’ve realized the value of it. The trouble is that I note is that steep learning curve at the beginning and many people actually have a hard time overcoming that steep learning curve like move on to the area where they start to realize value.

Why are people becoming more social, because they actually get response on the social web, faster or more efficiently than going to the phone or send an email or something like that, so, they go there and I think this is a change of behavior.

People don’t–people will start to ask questions online more and more than–I think right now still people call when they have problem, when they get frustrated and if they cannot get to the person then they go–I think in the future as the system gets more and more advanced and people collaborating more externally, helping each other then this resolution rate on these communities could be better than through the phone then, potentially we could–I think that we’ll shift people’s behavior towards asking question online than calling.

And I think there is also technology could also exchange. In the future, maybe instead of typing because people like to kind of listen to things or some people like listening I don’t know why, but, I mean I actually sometimes prefer just read it because I could jump back and forth I don’t have to–because listening, you have to kind of listen to the whole thing or there’s this temporal element to it, you cannot kind of scramble pieces of it and you won’t get very much out of it that way, but reading it, you could kind of jump back and forth and read what you want to read and what’s the solution that you want.

So, maybe people in the future–there wouldn’t people typing in questions or they would just–people would just leave a message and ask a question and then people could leave a message or type the solution out. It’s just a different ways that people could interact. I think that all that could help change the behavioral norm.

I think that to have a completely fluid kind of unstructured company is probably unreasonable. I wouldn’t say it’s completely unreasonable, but it’s probably unreasonable.

You could think of it from, by looking at biology. I mean, clearly I’m made of millions of cells, but it’s not like every single cell in my body is the same. I have a muscle cell, I have skin cell, they do different thing and they organize themselves into different organs or system that does different tasks.

So, there are need to be some different–there need to be some department, but the key is that those department need to communicate with each other. I think the breaking down of silo doesn’t mean that you have to do, I don’t know, you put an engineer in the marketing team–it doesn’t mean that. It means that the engineer should be aware of what the marketing doing and the marketing should be also aware on what are the engineers are doing as well. I think that awareness and being communicative in both sides is what it means to break down those silos.

I think this enterprise software, people are–management have a hard time getting people to use them because–precisely because one, they’re not fun. There’s no motivation for them to use that software, so gamification is one way to provide the motivation, not only provide the motivation, but also make it simple to do things, so I think I have a framework of how gamification should be implemented and also, you should start–you should aim at driving a convergence of three factors.

The first factor is motivation, the second one is ability, meaning people having the resource to do the task they need at a time they need to do it, so, I mean, so a lot of people–and then the last factor is a trigger, so if you can have a temporal convergence of motivation, ability and trigger then people would do the thing that you’d ask them to do because basically motivation just means that the person wants to do it, ability means that they have the resource and that the necessary resource to do what he needed to do at the time he needed to them and this resource can be skill or it can be simply time.

For example like, I have the skill to send a twit, but I can’t do it right now. I don’t have the ability to do it right now because I’m in an interview, but I don’t have the time resource–oops, that was a reminder of our interview that just popped up. So like, I don’t have the time resource right now to send a tweet because I’m interviewing with you, so that means I don’t have the ability to do it right now. It doesn’t mean that I don’t have the skill to send a tweet, anybody can send a tweet, so it’s very simple.

So, having the motivation and making it simple to do, so that people require less resource to do things, less time, less energy, less thinking, less–all that, making things simpler and it will help and then lastly, you want to have a trigger. You want to say like call to action, do it right now and most people would do it.

This is actually a behavior model from behavioral psychology, it’s called a Fogg Model, it’s created by a professor in Stanford. It’s called–his name is B.J. Fogg and Professor Fogg and I kind of discussed this before about what drives people to take action and underlying every human behavior, usually, there’s this convergence of these three factors.

So, if software design can implement some of these things, gamification ideas into the design then I think it could drive adoption easier–they’ll have easier time driving adoption.