GWI Online Marketing Concept - A Draft

Manchester, December 6, 2010
Unit 5G4140 – Strategic Planning for Digital Marketing Communication
»Digital Marketing « Plan

for GlobalWasteIdeas.org
Building up a waste ideas community.
Jan Schmiedgen Student ID 10980834 (3rd Semester)
Saved at: DATEN:Dropbox:S_Shared Projects:G_GlobalWasteIdeas:F_Final Concept Documents:GWI-OnlineMarketing-Concept.doc

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SEM Search Engine Marketing
SEO Search Engine Optimisation
SROI Social Return on Investment
PPC Pay per Click
ROI Return on Investment
TG Target Group
UAS, UAN Unique Activity System, Unique Activity Network
WOM Word of Mouth
Declaration of Authorship
I certify that the work presented here is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original
and the result of my own investigations, except as acknowledged, and has not been submit-
ted, either in part or whole, at this or any other University.
Jan Schmiedgen, December 6, 2010
-2-
Table of Contents
1! Challenges and Objectives................................................... 5!
1.1! Challenges ................................................................................................. 5!
1.2! Limitations and Technical Requirements .................................................... 8!
1.3! Communication Objectives ........................................................................ 9!
2! Techniques and Requirements............................................10!

2.1! Critique ................................................................................................... 10!
2.2! Critiqual Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators........................ 12!
2.3! The ROI-Question ................................................................................... 13!
3! Communications Planning.................................................14!
3.1! Channel Strategy (Proposal) ..................................................................... 14!
3.2! Offline Integration.................................................................................... 18!
3.3! Media Planning ....................................................................................... 19!
4! References .........................................................................20!
5! Appendix ..........................................................................25!
5.1! Some Screenflow Sketches........................................................................ 25!
5.2! GWI – Goals and Objectives .................................................................... 26!
5.3! Platform Classification and Competition – An Attempt ............................. 27!
5.4! Market Definition – A Try........................................................................ 29!
5.5! Key Stakeholders ..................................................................................... 31!
5.6! Community Lifecycle ............................................................................... 33!
5.7! The Steps of an SROI-Analysis................................................................. 33!
5.8! The Waste Life Cycle ............................................................................... 34!
5.9! Some Case Studies ................................................................................... 35!
5.9.1! Skeleton Sea ......................................................................................................35!
5.9.2! Biomer Plastics Reprocessing (BPR) ...................................................................37!
5.9.3! Fertiloo & Peepoople .........................................................................................39!
5.9.4! Ciudad Saludable – Healthy City ........................................................................41!
-3-
Introduction
GlobalWasteIdeas.org, in short GWI, will be a worldwide, multi-sided1 idea-sharing plat-
form for innovative ways to deal with waste. Its main purpose is to pragmatically bridge the
time period until the old industrial »cradle-to-grave« paradigm has been disestablished and
»cradle-to-cradle« (Braungart & McDonough 2009) has become reality. Until then the plat-
form serves the following goals: Collect and document today’s creative and original »waste
ideas«2 (see p. 35 ff. for examples) over the whole waste life cycle and over all levels of the
waste hierarchy3 that help people to live a more sustainable (and especially in developing
countries better) life; Establish a network of »unusual« participants that catalyses social en-
trepreneurship and new business idea generation in general; Broaden peoples perception of
waste as a valuable commodity; Enforce cross-cultural collaboration from bottom up; At-
tract also low involved people via sophisticated visual sense-making/representation of the
data (see p. 25 for some wireframes); and last but not least – in the sense of a typical design
thinking project4 – let people adopt and repurpose the platform to find out which possibili-
ties it actually inheres.
For this digital marketing plan such an experimental approach has several implications:
With the launch of the platform the business will be in an indefinitely exploration phase.
Neither will a profitable business model exist nor does GWI already know what next goals
and purposes it will have to serve in the future. At the present time no market research is
available, as the project itself is »market research« and searches for possible business oppor-
tunities (for the uploaded ideas on the platform as well as for GWI itself). Consequential
the following pages are mainly based on »thoroughly thought trough assumptions«. The
author therefore wants to apologize already in advance that some of the following out-
comes in this document are rather an academic exercise to meet the requirements of the
given course template/outline/structure.
1
In the sense of a consumer-vendor community that co-creates value (c. f. Prahalad & Ramaswamy (2004); Osterwalder & Pigneur (2009)).
2
This includes in particular the rather »unknown and unheard« grass-roots ideas that local bricoleurs (c.f. Bourdieu 1995; Lévi-Strauss
1966), organisations and social entrepreneurs develop within their cultures, communities, special life circumstances and contexts, worldwide.
3
GWI will use the official categories of the EU recycling coalition from 2005 ! Reduce: Lowering the amount of waste produced through
optimized production or adapted consumption, Reuse: Using materials repeatedly, Recycle: Using materials to make new products, Recove-
ry: Recovering energy from waste, Disposal: Putting waste to landfills or burning waste, Repair: Reassembling of malfunctioning or used
things, Repurpose: Using materials for alternative meaning, purpose and sensemaking
4
The idea for this project emerged in a course on the topic »design thinking« at Zeppelin University, Friedrichshafen (Germany). The class
was run by a former director of IDEO, Milano and pursued the goal of discovering cross-cultural and environmental action fields were new
business opportunities could be discovered. An approach that is in accordance with the concept of inversion stating that the new logic of value
creation is starting with the individual end user: „Instead of “What do we have and how can we sell it to you?” good business practices start
by asking “Who are you?” “What do you need?” and “How can we help?” This inverted thinking [as deeeply embedded in design thinking]
makes it possible to identify the assets that represent real value for each individual. Cash flow and profitability are derived from those assets.“
(Zuboff 2010)
-4-
1 Challenges and Objectives

There is an overwhelming bundle of trends that influence and provide the (marketing)
ground for a platform like GWI. Given the limited space of this report I will just list a few,
excluding their classification in a trend typology and not claiming completeness. In the
following labelled trends are marked italic. Some are described in more detail in the appen-
dix at page 46.
1.1 Challenges
GENERAL BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT CHALLENGES
The world is amidst a great rebalancing and despite the fact that there is a rising awareness
for environmental issues within people, according to the United Nations (2010) the exploit-
ation of natural resources and unsustainable consumption will dramatically increase. Des-
pite environmental problems and along with it rising inequality, shifting values and social
norms, growing risk sensitivity and resulting protest/consumerism movements this develop-
ment will have tough economic consequences for western economies: Constrained supply
due to pressure on commodity markets, increased regulatory and social scrutiny, growing prize-
sensitive demand from emerging markets (as we have no cheap labour, productivity needs to
be even more improved), to name just a few.
Supranational and national government organisations are to the greatest possible extent
paralysed (cp. Kyoto, UNEP, … etc.) as they can’t bring the many yet unsolved trade-offs
between economic development and ecological risk provisioning to a international consen-
sus. However, paralelly a heavily subsidised »race« in search for the most promising (green)
future technologies has started amongst the leading countries in the world as they will pro-
vide their main competitive hallmark in the future. These efforts are mostly accompanied
by huge campaigns, raising public awareness and understanding for this, as well as by sup-
porting regulatory schemes (trends: the market state, pricing the planet, producing public good in
the grid, etc.). For companies1 and governments2 in general this means pressure from all
sides and the need to radically rethink the way they’re configurating their (business) activi-
ties.
INDUSTRY CHALLENGES
While some organisations already make heavy use of collective intelligence, crowdsourcing
and open innovation, our research has shown that many institutions in and around the
waste industry and regulations still stick to closed innovation approaches and top-down
regulation. And although there are all those undeniable massive business opportunities (cf.
1
Firms for example can no longer externalise their internalities (Coase 1990) and will have to account for »social costs« in the future.
2
Governments however need practical search patterns that help them discovering the most promising action fields (competitive future techno-
logies and national talent) to support in the future – independently from what lobby groups think. At the same time they have to balance
environmental regulations and economic growth opportunties.
-5-
Defra 2010) the search behaviour for the latter often is still biased (wrong basic assump-
tions, old »innovation approaches and research methods«, paralysing path dependencies,
etc.) – on industry as well as government side (cf. Chesbrough et al. 2006; Lester & Piore
2004; Hippel 2006). This can be dangerous, as industry boundaries are blurring, consump-
tion patterns change and »growth« will mainly be generated in emerging markets. Who
knows if it is not a young indian low-tech company that will disintermediate established
value chains of multi-national corporations as its solutions are more effective and viable
also for saturated and pressurised western markets? Be it for the sake of monitoring new
market entrants or for discovering new business opportunities, the »environmental in-
dustry« (sensu latu) is well advised to find new ways to monitor, catalyse and implement
innovation. In fact, providers like Veolia already use upstream innovation sources (Veolia
Environnement 2010) but most of them are not really open to a broader range of partici-
pants1 (cf. appendix »5.3 Platform Classification and Competition – An Attempt«, p. 27).
Exactly here the need for action is located. According to the McKinsey Global Institute
(2010) these top mega tech trends will influence the future business landscape and therefore
affect aforementioned participants: distributed co-creation moving into the mainstream, networks
becoming the organisation, innovating from the bottom of the pyramid, and many more relevant
(cf. Figure 13: Trends, drivers and forces affecting/favouring GlobalWasteIdeas.o, p. 46).
This combined with the realisation that knowledge distribution and cross-linkage bears
»grass-roots« solutions to problems2 – often also embedded to a respective (cultural, geo-
graphical, community, etc.) context3 and therefore catalysing success even more – puts
companies under immense pressure to act. Not to speak of, last but not least, disruptive
substitute solutions from other industries and players that are less »grass-roots« but know
how to take advantage of above mentioned developments. I think I don’t need to deduce
here why GWI therefore could be a helpful tool for people in facing all mentioned challen-
ges. Instead I would like to draw the attention to GWI’s internal issues.
INTERNAL CHALLENGES
The probably biggest challenge is: GWI doesn’t exist yet! ! Therefore everything needs to
be build up from scratch. For the purpose of this assessment document I’ll assume in the
following, the platform already exists and we face the key challenge of attracting users to the
website. As GWI all depends on the size and quality of its community we will already have
to start gathering potential contributors before the official launch. Not only for co-
development and alpha testing purposes, but also for collecting a critical mass of dissemina-
1
According to Pisano & Verganti (2008) firms can use four basic modes of collaborating with outsiders. Veolia already uses three: Close co-
operations with an elite circle network of researchers and other handpicked contributers, joint ventures with participants from other indu-
stries solving special (more or less defined) problems in the form of an consortium and finally (for exactly defined problems) surely also inno-
vation malls like innocentive.com. Probably also the use crowdsourcing – like articleonepartners.com for the efficient execution of patent
research – will already take place in the industry. However our research indicates, that no open participative, flat governed model in the form
of an innovation community is used, respectively exits so far.
2
Relevant trends: citizen R&D, networked artisans, personal design and fabrication due to easier access to manufacturing equipment, etc.
3
The self-assertion of technical solutions increases if it comes along with a compelling story and is rooted in (behavioral) routines, values,
living contexts etc. of the respective peer groups/communites. Therefore »social innovation« is another critical key for the acceptance of any
proposal to the market (cf. Verganti 2009).
-6-
tors. Furthermore in such an interaction knowledge can be gained about the various needs
of our future users. Although GWI can serve a variety of purposes and may be highly rel-
evant for many interest groups, we need these insights, as they will help us in custom tailor-
ing the »right brand messages« to attract (connect to) respective stakeholders.
Figure 1: Preliminary stakeholdermap for GWI
As GWI will be a »two-sided grassroots platform« it is very hard to exactly specify its
stakeholders, respectively »target groups1«. Nondegradable waste is probably one of the
biggest problems mankind faces. So to speak in terms of the »butterfly effect«, basically
every human on the whole world is affected by our acts of consumption – even by those
taking place in other parts of the world (e.g. leading to the irretrievable indulgence of natu-
ral resources like oil, rare gases, etc.). Nevertheless the interests of our prospective stake-
holders couldn’t be more contrasting and every group also differs regarding their levels of
involvement with the topic. If we want to efficiently build a community we therefore we
need to start with those highly involved people (e.g. activists, industry, regulators) who
already have some knowledge as well as an overview over the development in the »waste
(industry) world«. On that account the community building needs to split up into two steps:
Phase 1 woos highly involved people and collects their knowledge to build up a critical mass of
»entertaining« content that in turn attracts low involved people in phase 2. They consume that
1
In a first step one could roughly cluster our »worldwide TGs« into three classes: On the micro-level we have all individuals producing waste
(mankind). On a meso-level we adress the industry in general and special waste managing companies in particular. On a macro-level society,
government and politics are adressed. More detailed clusters will emerge, once the platform runs.
-7-
knowledge in the first place and hopefully get converted to contributors later on. But as if
that wasn't already enough we also have to take into consideration that many, if not most,
of our low involved people are even hard to reach.
1.2 Limitations and Technical Requirements

Namely GWI faces the challenge of trying to cover the most promising cases, from espe-
cially those emerging and »digital divide« countries, where (broadband) internet connection
is either not available or slow. How this can be achieved in the long run will not be part of
this concept1, we only need to be aware, that the low internet penetration in the most inter-
esting countries forces us to start our introduction and launch campaigns in the »devel-
oped« internet world. However, as Figure 2 shows, growth figures in less developed regions
give profound reason for hope that the once the platform is established more people in
those can access it – be it via desktop computers or mobile devices. Nevertheless I assume
in the following that our launch takes place (resp. is going to be remarked) worldwide.
WORLD INTERNET USAGE AND POPULATION STATISTICS
Figure 2: World internet usage and population statistics

(Sources: Miniwatts Marketing Group 2010; International Telecommunication Union 2010; Nielsen 2010)
Furthermore GWI needs to take into account that even in OECD countries still 29% of all
subscribers access the internet with cable modems (OECD 2009). That means that the basic
functionality of the site also needs to work without fast connections and bandwidth con-
suming technologies like AJAX or Flash. Regarding that, especially (mobile) browser2 op-
timisation will be a central issue. With this background information in mind now our
communication objectives can be formulated.
1
Some ideas are for example to include NGOs via special incentives as our case collectors in the forefront of grassroots fieldwork. Also teachers
(often the most highly educated persons, especially in rural areas) in local communities are good information sources and may be they are
good idea disseminators too. Both groups have either regular internet access or from time to time.
2
In »developing« countries not only the hardware very often is quite antiquated but also software (here browsers) are rather old. Therefore
GWI also has to be optimised for – often IE-based – kiosk systems (as people/NGOs often use internet cafes as only access to internet) with
slow connections.
-8-
1.3 Communication Objectives
If the key challenge is to build a community that produces content for the platform, we have to
turn – especially high involved – visitors as fast and convincing as possible to higher levels
of the conversion funnel shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Possible GWI User Hierarchy/Funnel (compiled by author)
That in turn already requires a critical mass of cases on the platform because „to attract the
»consumers« of the content, you have to have »publishers« first, but it's hard to get »pub-
lishers« to the service without »consumers« (unkown 2010).“ Deduced from this, the »com-
munication« objectives for GWI are as follows:
MAIN OBJECTIVES
Objectives are very challenging to raise the bars of our efforts. They have to be achieved with no/low budget,
but the manpower of the founders and to be acquired volunteers as well as a few sponsors and crowdfunding.
Produce a critical mass of at least 100 initial case studies until the launch of the beta version!
Attract around 1,000,000 unique visitors and 70,000 members (7% conversion rate) in two years after launch.
Thereof at least
a) 40,000 members as fully-registered users (4% full-registering conversion rate),
b) 30,000 as semi-registered users and
c) 100 as very active contributors (lead users with a 0.01% contribution efficiency conversion rate).
SIDE OBJECTIVES
Attract at least 50 highly qualified disseminators in different countries, spreading our idea
and convincing people to become editors for the platform in the first half year after launch.
Research and get to know new case providers/sources to fill up our database.
Establish relations with media people.
-9-
2 Techniques and Requirements

2.1 Critique
As GWI doesn’t exist yet, itself cannot be criticised. Instead general pitfalls in similar in-
dustries could be examined. But GWI is a multisided platform, performing a multitude of
functions for a heterogeneous group of customers/stakeholders overlapping with a variety of
alternative solutions that would also solve those functions. According to Abell (1980) the
intersections of these three dimensions constitute the solution space, one calls »market«. If
for example we take a closer look at the »customer group/alternative solution matrix« (cf.
appendix Table 2, p. 30) we see that some of our prospective users are also »competitors« in
terms of the services they provide (e.g. governmental institutions vs. governmental service agencies
or waste industry/waste consultants vs. waste industry/waste consultants). In terms of customer
functions governmental service agencies would also be our biggest »competitor« (cf. appen-
dix Table 3, p. 30). But are they? Rather are waste consultants. But even they could be gra-
teful users of our platform within certain win-win scenarios. So what to analyse? The
innovation behaviour of the waste industry (as already mentioned in 1.1 Challenges) or the
integrated marketing approaches of other idea-collecting platforms (in general, from gov-
ernmental organisations, etc.)? I decided to not analyse any particular actions (SEO, SEM,
SMA, etc.) of our customers/competitors, as at this point it makes no sense at all. More-
over I will examine very shortly the general pitfalls in online community building itself.
STARTING AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE BUT NOT SIMPLER
One of the most important and difficult tasks is to find the right balance between an already
»finished« (platform) solution with many functionalities and the integration of the com-
munity in the platform development process. The basic bug-tracked functionalities as well
as participation1 mechanisms already need to exist in the beta version of the site, otherwise
attracted users would perceive the website as a construction site. However the initial site
shouldn’t be over-featured, as users a) show more cohesion when they have a feeling of co-
production and b) can bring up their own ideas for further development (hook up not to
explore options). To fulfil our objectives a »GWI intro campaign« therefore has to align
two aims: 1) Attracting people to the platform (seeding phase) and 2) keeping them engaged
on the latter (engaging phase), while considering the different information and moderating
needs over a community lifecycle (cf. p. 33). Especially in our initial »on boarding« stage
we will need to provide most of the content ourselves as new entrants will judge the quality
of the platform according to that.
1
According to the MIT – Center for Collective Intelligence (Malone et al. 2009), a good collective intelligence platform (CI) must address the
following themes: goals (referring to the desired outcome ! What is to be accomplished?), incentives (referring to the motivational factors !
Why should anyone help out?), structure/process (referring to the business model and organizational structure to complete the task ! How
are they meant to contribute?) and staffing (referring to the people required to support the business model and sustainability of CI within the
organization ! Who will per-form the necessary work?).
- 10 -
Mashable (Betancourt 2009; Betancourt 2010; Catone 2009) suggests several tips and rules
for promoting/seeding social businesses1 and increasing community engagement2. Com-
plementary they show how to avoid the most common »traps«3 within those steps. How-
ever, most of them are pretty obvious or have already been mentioned. GWIs biggest chal-
lenge here will be the high diversity of targeted user groups. Especially during the seeding phase
custom-tailored key messages, media environments, and seeding methods need to be de-
veloped. Therefore the setup and handling of different conversation streams that are made
to stick (C. Heath & D. Heath 2007) is crucial. In the following these thoughts flow into in
the short overview of CSFs, KPIs and ROIs that apply to our main objectives.
1
Attraction tips: 1. Remember: Social Media is a Conversation, 2. Be Active and Responsive, 3. Be Personal and Authentic, 4. Encourage
Sharing, 5. Make Social Media an Organization-wide Activity
2
1. Make it easy to participate, 2. be a leader (good example), 3. interact with the community, welcome newbies, identify and nurture power
users, showcase and cross promote UGC, reward contributors, be timely about posting UGC, allow profile creation and engage with popular
existing communities (Betancourt 2009).
3
Traps are: 1. the gaping hole perception, 2. no community cohesion, 3. don’t downplay the audience, 4. don’t betray the community, 5.
don’t try to be everywhere, 6. no internal support for the community manager, 7. don’t be a dictator and 8. avoid social media staffing
bottlenecks (Betancourt 2010).
- 11 -
2.2 Critiqual Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators

Objectives Critical Success Factors KPIs ROIs
Produce a critical Gathering case studies from not yet known sources, while checking if the n.a. hardly
mass of at least respective sites are possible (link) partners for GWI. fore-
100 initial case seeable:
Finding editors who support us in our search (activist groups, NGOs, etc.).
studies until the see next
launch of the beta Make sure to permanently develop and maintain a map of our prospec- page for
version! tive and particular GWI social media ecosystem a com-
ment
Attract around Secure funding for IT (hosting/server(s), loadbalancer, etc.) Donations received
1,000,000 unique and GWI roadshow travelling expenses.
visitors and 70,000 Number of Backlinks
Having compiled a volunteer team of programmers,
members in two Number of volunteers we collect to bring
designers and first editors.
years after launch. platform and initial content to life.
Create some pre-launch buzz for already creating some
Intensity of buzz (number of positive mentions)
link authority and awareness for the official launch.
in all kind of publications (blog entries, press
Gather marketing and PR (student) supporters worldwide that help with clippings, Facebook wall posts, etc.)
the respective local media roll-outs (friends, acquaintances, volunteers).
Number intercessors, influencers, dissemina-
Collecting famous intercessors (actors, scientists, politicians, etc.) that tors and opinion leaders that (in)officially
promote our idea or provide us with quotes we can use in our campaign. support us.
Researching the contacts of appropriate mass media that shall flank our An overall 7% user registering conversion rate
social web campaign and establish a relationship with them. ( = leads (people attracted by the campaign)
Having programmed the basic platform (tested by friends in early proto- CPA: Cost per Acquisition
type stadium) for beta testing, including the setup of clever participation
Feedback: Number of comments from site,
and incentive mechanisms (cf. the building blocks of collective intelli-
mail, etc.
gence, Malone et al. 2009; MIT - Center for Collective Intelligence 2010).
User/Community satisfaction index
Having gathered more insights (motivations, needs, pain points, contexts
of usage, etc.) on our prospective stakeholders and user groups in order Site performance and availability
to setup our brand message variations for the seeding phase (also
knowing their cognitive frames for search behaviour/memes etc.). Average visiting time on site
Having constructed personas that reflect possible usage scenarios, user Visits to register
roles in general and standard use cases.
Referrer mix
Rapidly building up a qualified link base by registering the site to all
Share of search (dominant occupation of
kinds of thematic catalogues, link lists and partner sites after having
strategic memes and phrases)
thought through the SE strategy according to our users cognitive frames.
Number of referrals to the community by
Creating a big buzz via a fully integrated campaign with special prepared
members
landing pages for every user group.
WOM generated by community, etc.
a) 40,000 fully- Setup of a well-designed and clever on-site info-/entertainment 4% full registering conversion rate (transition
registered users conversion funnel towards registering. of lurkers into active community members)
Supporting people in the fast establishment of peer-connections, nCase inspiration connections

once they have registered (increase cohesion).
Site register conversion rate (from user to
b) 30,000 semi- Steady flow of new content (updates, new cases, news, etc.) member)
registered users via RSS, Newsletter or FB wall posts, etc. to keep peoples attention.
Activity/participation level: Average contribu-
Special (upgrade) campaigns for semi-registered users, stimulating tion frequency (e. g. ratio of comments per
them to fully register/complete their profiles. post), nActivated, Dormant, nLapsed, etc.
c) 100 active Preparation of special incentives/rewarding mechanisms for lead users 0.01% contribution efficiency rate (number of
contributors people contributing)
Arranging meetings (annual events?) to meet physically with lead users.
nCases per contributor, etc.
Table 1: Critical Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators
- 12 -
2.3 The ROI-Question

The question for any ROI of GWI is hard to answer, especially in the early stages its com-
munity lifecycle (Abelson 2010): Firstly GWI is a (business) experiment whose prospective
revenue model is everything but clear. Conceivable revenue options for us may be subscrip-
tion models (i.e. our disliked option of »premium content«), the ubiquitous but obvious
advertising financing, the coupling to a governmental or commercial organisation that
funds it, or more venturesome – a micropay per case option by VCs that are interested in a
diverse and maintained high quality platform. But what’s the use of any promising scen-
arios if we don’t know yet whether they are even viable? At the moment we don’t care
about any returns. In terms of time we put in without getting something out, the project
already is a financial »disaster«. But we don’t care. Our »ROI« is experience, good karma
and in the long-term personal reputation – obviously all not real financial measures, what
in turn leads us to the general discussion of the dilution of the ROI econometric. Many
marketers adapted the concept with (among others) the idea of an attention economy1
(Franck 1998) in mind and invented measures like Return on Engagement, Return on Par-
ticipation, Return on Involvement, Return on Attention or Return on Trust2. As important
as they may be, these measures also don’t helps us along, as they are not referencing to
»real« financial returns/measures but results (Solis 2010).
Furthermore another question looms large: For whom do we create value? About whose
ROI do we actually talk3? Obviously not (just) about ours. Rather about the different and
particular ROIs for all of our stakeholders within the business eco-system we operate in
(some examples can be found in the appendix: Table 5, p. 33). But how can the socio-
economic value4 creation in such a public innovation eco-system (Emerson et al. 2001,
p.137) be described, measured and quantified (not to speak of getting prognosticated)? To
determine GWIs ROIs it needs a measure that describes the value of its impacts, by using
1
Here in the controversial sense of »attention transactions« replacing financial transactions as the main focus of our economic systems.
2
„Return on Engagement: The duration of time spent either in conversation or interacting with social objects, and in turn, what transpired
that’s worthy of measurement; Return on Participation: The metric tied to measuring and valuing the time spent participating in social
media through conversations or the creation of social objects; Return on Involvement: Similar to participation, marketers explored touch-
points for documenting states of interaction and tied metrics and potential return of each; Return on Attention: In the attention economy, we
assess the means to seize attention, hold it, and measure the response; Return on Trust: A variant on measuring customer loyalty and the
likelihood for referrals, a trust barometer establishes the state of trust earned in social media engagement and the prospect of generating
advocacy and how it impacts future business. (Solis 2010)“
3
Not to mention the attempt to define and operationalise »investment«. Who invests what if we build the platform with our working time
together with an open source community of volunteers? Can the contributions of our (beta) users and disseminators also be seen as »invest-
ments«?
4
The transformative value of social purpose enterprises occurs along a continuum from economic, over socio-economic to social value. Eco-
nomic value creation happens in most for-profit organisations and „[...] is created by taking a resource or set of inputs, providing additional
inputs or processes that increase the value of those inputs, and thereby generate a product or service that has greater market value at the next
level of the value chain.“ Respective measures have developed over centuries, resulting in a host of [standard] econometrics (ROI, debt/equity
ratios, price/earnings, etc.). „Social value [however] is created when resources, inputs, processes or policies are combined to generate impro-
vements in the lives of individuals or society as a whole. It is in this arena that most non-profits justify their existence, and unfortunately it is
at this level that one has the most difficulty measuring the true value created. [...] Socio-economic value [finally] builds on the foundation of
economic value creation by attempting to quantify and incorporate certain elements of social value. An entity creates socio-economic value by
making use of resources, inputs, or processes; increasing the value of these inputs, and by then generating cost savings for the public system
or environment of which the entity is a part. These cost savings are potentially realized in decreased public dollar expenditures and partially
in increased revenues to the public sector, in the form of additional taxes.“ (Emerson et al. 2001, p.137)
- 13 -
financial proxies representing our benefits that are not usually captured in a »market econ-
omy«.
Various approaches1 try to operationalise these complex coherences. The most expedient –
although not perfect – method for GWI seems to be a Social Return on Investment2 (SROI)
calculation. Only such an analysis could really give a holistic and sufficiently complex an-
swer to understand the full returns that GWI could leverage for its stakeholders and »man-
kind« at large. The bad news for this strategy conception template is: We do not have en-
ough data yet to even start such an analysis (cf. appendix, p. 33, »The Steps of an SROI-
Analysis«) and the author dares to further play with assumptions made up out of thin air. !
3 Communications Planning
3.1 Channel Strategy (Proposal)
As our CSFs on p. 12 have shown, the main challenge is to create sufficient content and
buzz in the beginning – whereas both is dependent on each other (cf. »buzz cycle« (Bacon
2009)). For the sake of simplification, our diverse target groups have been split up into two
groups in the following: low involved (e.g. »ordinary people«, general manufacturing com-
panies) and high involved persons (e.g. activist groups, waste industry, governmental insti-
tutions). Figure 4 shows an ideal-typical (and very simplified) seeding setup GWI could use.
Within this setup different customer journeys are conceivable (also depending on the cre-
ative main idea our campaign will be aligned to). Although the standard journeys in those
routes may be different, a lot of »overlapping« content could be used for both involvement
groups. In detail I suggest the use of the following digital communication channels and
approaches:
SOCIAL WEB
Especially our low-involved TGs with their restricted attention spans need to be engaged in
conversations that use simple but convincing edutainment approaches3. That means we
have to curate content in a variety of ways – always differentiated between our low and
high involved recipients. One will be setting up Vimeo/Youtube video channels, that high-
light and present the best cases and other topic-related content (presentations, TED talks,
documentaries, etc.). Out of that we could (let) produce podcasts that are offered for down-
load or subscription via all the channels we serve. One of this channels obviously is Face-
1
e.g. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or Social Accounting
2
According to Social Economy Scotland, „SROI measures an organisation’s added value by calculating the social, environmental and
economic benefits it creates and by attributing a financial value to them. It is based on standard accounting principles and investment apprai-
sal techniques.“ (Unite For Sight 2009)
3
Recent entertaining examples are the Volkswagen »Fun Principle«, »The Girl Effect« (Nike Foundation and Care.org) or the »Entrepre-
neursday Virals« (http://entrepreneursday.org).
- 14 -
book1, were we could aggregate other content i.e. within a GWI group page (partly auto-
matically via SocialRSS, partly manual and self-produced) facilitating engagement2. By
identifying and using »social web power users« we will leverage our seeding campaign.
That’s why we already »collect« authority persons contacts of every conceivable service.
Figure 4: First draft of a channel strategy for GWI
BLOGOSPHERE AND SPECIAL INTEREST NEWS SERVICES

The above mentioned channel-diversicated setup is however merely the basic structure for
our Online-PR. To spread our messages we also need to encourage our friends, dissemina-
1
Of course Facebook is just representative for the different national and international social networks that enjoy popularity in the world.
Despite Facebook e.g. global networks like friendster.com (still used in south-east asia), hi5.com, bebo.com or orkut.com are also potential
(low-involvement) environments to spread our messages. Locally platforms like renren.com, xiaonei.com, kaixin001.com and 51.com (for
China) or mixi.jp (Japan) and vkontakte.ru (Russia) are interesting (just to mention a few). The creation of respective buzz in these local
environments is a task we cannot accomplish ourselves. It will be a task for disseminators of our community that engage locally in those
communities.
2
According to Chopra (2010) the following top-categories cause engagement on Facebook: „1. Contests and giveaways; 2. Quizzes, surveys,
polls, requests for feedback so every relevant question attracts an answer (i. e. engagement) ; 3. Humor, jokes and trivia; 4. Controversy or
debate; 5. Patriotism (especially in countries like India and Japan) ; 6. Real-life stories or examples; 7. Breaking news; 8. Unexpected infor-
mation; 9. Interesting pictures and videos; in the U. S. and other developed nations, where Internet bandwidth is not an issue videos are
viewed even more than pictures“
- 15 -
tors and sympathizers to engage in microblogging for GWI (Twitter, identi.ca, Facebook,
etc.). We will also have to compile a list with »bloggers of authority«, liaise with them and
let them mention our story in order to reach our intended recipients in their particular
sphere of influence. This is especially important for our special interest sites within our
»high-involved route«. One clever way for example could be making PR for our cases (i.e.
writing articles or press releases for them). By valorising the »innovating heroes« of our
platform we also make PR for ourselves, e.g. by interspersing quotes and cross connections
to GWI via the »back door«. Another conceivable win-win situation could be, being the
official supplier of cases for the many »waste idea books« that many designers and writers
(are going to) publish at the moment (i.e. www.retrash.com). Regardless of ideas and ap-
proaches – the important thing always is to forge more or less strategic alliances with kin-
dred spirits over all channels. Because exactly this will ensure the attention and attraction
of high-involved prospects we can then convert into case contributors and editors. Once
(and while) we set this ball rolling we should also fortify the use of social bookmarking
services (especially Digg, Reddit, StumbleUpon and Delicious). If our campaign/content
goes popular on these »connector« sites it may well spread faster.
And once the community establishes we should also encourage, enable and support our
members to use every opportunity to be interviewed on websites, podcasts, videocasts, or in
magazines. Again the goal is to valorise them in order to valorise ourselves (Goffman
1982).
PROFESSIONAL MEDIA RELATIONS

The materials we have produced anyways can be easily transformed to any other format.
Therefore we’ll also use the opportunity to supply the established media with interesting
quality content (notwithstanding that we maintain our mandatory standard PR-relations
like announcing our website launch and other GWI-related events). This could be maga-
zine articles, features or Q&As we contribute1 tailored to the mediums respective audience.
The goal then is to get published in authority media on- and offline and have GWI either
mentioned (increases level of awareness) or even better linked (quality link building). For
the sake of the latter every piece of PR with a GWI link inside will also be distributed via e-
release services.
SEARCH
I don’t want to look into standard SEO2 in detail, as I regard it as a basic prerequisite that
will be taken into account very thoroughly when building the site. Besides that the best
SEO for GWI will be the buzz our introduction campaign/content produces (even our
1
We could send over a list of topics we could write about or just write articles and submit it.
2
Standard SEO includes e.g. taking into account the search anatomy for our to be occupied search terms/phrases (amount of words, stop
words, anti log, spellings, synonyms, word order), doing a respective search strategy/keyword analysis, on-page optimisation (keyword
density, word frequency, friendly URLs and speaking file names, XHTML tag optimisations, internal cross-linkage, link depth, etc.) as well
as off-page optimisation (increase link popularity and qualified backlinks with predefined anchor texts, link baiting, avoid duplicate content,
control the appropriate speed of link growth if possible, domain rings, etc.).
- 16 -
press releases will then be optimised to the key phrases we need to occupy). However I
have three remarks and one idea that I regard worth mentioning: We will make no use of
paid search as it would counteract our grassroots impression in the beginning. We will also
have the difficulty that we don’t know the mental (search) models of our diverse user
groups yet. Therefore the long-term preparation of to be occupied subject areas/topics with
its respective search phrases or even memes isn’t possible at the outset. Its creation will be
an iterative (learning) process during the collection of knowledge about our users (tracking
data, user interviews, market research etc.). The same applies to the optimization of our
different landing pages that have to be tested and refined1 until conversions are optimised.
The mentioned idea is the establishment of an authority list tagged to GWI (i.e. »GWI Top
List of Sustainability Sites«2) that could help us in producing a lot of qualified »good neigh-
bourhood« backlinks with GWI-related content.
COOPERATIONS
As already mentioned we need to seed our idea and the site with opinion leaders, prospec-
tive publishers and voluntary co-workers. We therefore have to get access to existing com-
munities, ask for help and invite people to republish our content. In order to gain the
needed attention we could inquire celebrities (movie stars or the like) to spread our message
by being one of our »brand ambassadors«. We could also ask movie makers for help, re-
garding the professional preparation of our campaign contents. Handselected corporations
could be the first official sponsors of the platform and serve also as disseminators in the
corporate world.
GENERAL »OFFLINE INTEGRATION«

The »real« web influencers however are easiest to reach in real life not via impersonal elec-
tronic communication. Therefore the most crucial part of our seeding campaign is to take
part in conference presentations, talks, barcamps and important sustainability/waste-
related events. Furthermore we’ll submit papers and presentation suggestions ourselves to
respective conferences (topics will always be related to GWI, e.g. design thinking, social-
and open innovation, anthropological research approaches, etc.). Additionally we’ll en-
courage our members as well to submit papers and follow us suit.
Another way of spreading the idea with an already growing member base is to organise
local events and meetings (e.g. presenting our cases or new projects that emerged our of our
members connections, etc.). First they could for example be attached to big formats like
local TED talks. Later our members should be encouraged to organise their own formats
(meetings, events, open days, etc.) to tell their version of our/their story.
1
One approach to achieve this is for example Googles Siteoptimisation Tool that lets you test randomly different versions of the same page
with your users. The best converting can then be used later. ! https://www.google.com/analytics/siteopt/new_expt?account=XXXXXX.
2
If we’d carry that to the extremes, we could even establish an own »GlobalWasteIdea Award« recognising the best ideas (of the year or
another period of time). This wouldn’t just generate media attention but also traffic and organic SEO.
- 17 -
THE LANDING PAGES

The landing pages are the first culmination point of our campaign as they are the start of
our on-site conversion funnel. At least three related cases are showcased with short videos,
pictures, the link to the case itself and additional rich media (interviews, reports about the
idea). All the cases have in common, that we emphasize the community’s contribution to
its »birth« or implementation. Once the users realized that they could play a crucial role (in
the distribution of information about those ideas, in the further development of them, with
their own ideas/projects – be them as small as they be) and make a difference to the current
status quo of the world (respectively discover business opportunities), we hopefully convert
them to users or disseminators.
In order to alleviate their decision and overcome their last parts of scepticism we list ben-
efits of a »membership«, provide incentives like prizes or the like (e.g. trash art from Skel-
etonSea, p. 35) and we prepare a short FAQ that clarifies the last objections. If the user
shouldn’t be convinced through this page we can nevertheless encourage him to spread our
messages through his social web accounts with prepared messages. This is just one click,
but increases the likelihood of getting in contact with people we could convert to users.
The low-involved landing pages will contain more sensational, entertaining and surprising
content that emphasises »fun-, wow- and cool-effects« (e.g. SkeletonSea, p. 35 or Pee-
poople, p. 39 in appendix). The high-involved route is characterised by more complex cases
showcasing technological or intermeshed social innovations (e.g. Healthy City, p. 41 or
BPR, p. 37 in appendix).
FURTHER GENERAL THINGS TO CONSIDER

We’re already slowly building up a structured (mail) address base of supporters and future
users within our private and professional contacts. E-mail marketing therefore plays a ra-
ther tangential role at the moment. However if we have to opportunity to access the user
base of »partner platforms« within our cooperations we’d use them immediately – also via
traditional mail.
Part of building the crucial user base in the beginning will be the creation of active »fake
users« consisting of friends, family and our broader private network.
3.2 Offline Integration

Although this is a »digital marketing plan« the author believes that it makes no sense to
artificially separate the offline integration. Therefore respective proposals have already been
woven into the thoughts above.
- 18 -
3.3 Media Planning

Before a »real« media planning can be done the platform already needs to be in pla-
ce/programmed and initial market research on our TG patterns of reception as well as
media environments1 also has to be finished. Only if this data is available we can choose
the adequate media to cluster and configure a custom-tailored media plan for every of our
TGs. The time table in »Figure 5« is therefore very simplified but it shows general timing
dependencies and the time horizons we’re talking about.
Figure 5: Time table for GWI introduction campaign
Again this is just a rough proposal that can change if opportunities arise. If for example we
have the chance to surf on major news waves that are related to our topics, we’ll do that
immediately by rearranging our schedule. Therefore permanent agenda monitoring (i.e. via
Google Trends) is a self-evident part of both PR and SEO activities we perform. Besides
that timing and media planning are also dependent on the creative main idea (cf. Percy &
Elliott 2005) that will guide our seeding campaign.
1
For our high-involved users, lets say »environmental activists« or partly also »governmental service agencies« sites like
http://environment.change.org, http://www.care2.com/greenliving/ or http://www.care2.com/causes/environment/could be an adequa-
te media environment. People from our »VC and Private Equity« group however will rather be targeted at sites like
http://www.economist.com/science-technology/ or http://www.ft.com and the like.
- 19 -
4 References
Abell, D.F., 1980. Defining the Business - The Starting Point of Strategic Planning, NJ: Engle-
wood Cliffs.
Abelson, R., 2010. HOW TO: Manage a Sustainable Online Community. Mashable/Social
Media. Available at: http://mashable.com/2010/07/30/sustainable-online-
community/ [Accessed November 20, 2010].
Bacon, J., 2009. The Art of Community: Building the New Age of Participation 1st ed., Sebasto-
pol: O’Reilly Media.
Betancourt, L., 2009. 10 Rules for Increasing Community Engagement. Mashable/Business.

Available at: http://mashable.com/2009/12/16/community-engagement/ [Acces-
sed November 20, 2010].
Betancourt, L., 2010. 8 Things to Avoid When Building a Community. Mashable/Business.

Available at: http://mashable.com/2010/01/05/community-engagement-pitfalls/
[Accessed November 20, 2010].
Bisson, P., Stephenson, E. & Viguerie, S.P., 2010. Pricing the Planet. McKinsey Quarterly -
Public Sector - Government Regulation. Available at:
https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Growth/Pricing_the_planet_2629
Bourdieu, P., 1995. Outline of a Theory of Practice, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Braungart, M. & McDonough, W., 2009. Cradle to Cradle, London: Vintage.
Catone, J., 2009. 5 Essential Tips for Promoting Your Charity Using Social Media. Masha-
ble/Social Good. Available at: http://mashable.com/2009/08/21/charity-social-
media/ [Accessed November 20, 2010].
Chaffey, D. et al., 2009. Internet Marketing: Strategy, Implementation and Practice 4th ed., Es-
sex: Prentice Hall.
Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. & West, J., 2006. Open Innovation: Researching a New
Paradigm, Oxford University Press.
Chopra, P., 2010. Why Will People Come to Your Company Facebook Page? - India Chief
Mentor - WSJ. Wallstreet Journal / India Chief M entor. Available at:
http://blogs.wsj.com/india-chief-mentor/2010/06/21/why-will-people-come-to-
your-company-facebook-page/ [Accessed November 23, 2010].
Coase, R.H., 1990. The Firm, the Market, and the Law, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Daren C. Brabham, 2011. Crowdsourcing: A model for leveraging online communities -
- 20 -
Unpublished Draft. In Jennifer Henderson & Aaron Delwiche, eds. The Routledge
Handbook of Participatory Culture. Oxford: Routledge. Available at:
http://dbrabham.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/brabham_handbook_crowdsourci
ng.pdf.
Defra, C.A.I.W., 2010. "Less is more": business opportunities in waste & resource mana-
gement. Available at:
http://www.wmro.org/displayResource.aspx/9473/_Less_is_more_business_opp
ortunities_in_waste_resource_management_.html [Accessed October 15, 2010].
Dustin Haisler & Margarita Quihuis, 2010. Gov 2.0: How to pick a citizen idea platform.
GovFresh - Open Air Government. Available at: http://govfresh.com/2010/01/how-
to-pick-a-citizen-idea-platform/ [Accessed November 12, 2010].
Emerson, J., Wachowicz, J. & Chun, S., 2001. Social Return on Investment (SROI): Exploring
Aspects of Value Creation, San Francisco: The Roberts Enterprise Development Fund.
Available at: http://www.redf.org/download/boxset/REDF_Vol2_8.pdf.
Franck, G., 1998. Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit : Ein Entwurf, München: Hanser.
Goffman, E., 1982. Interaction Ritual - Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior 1st ed., New York:
Pantheon.
Heath, C. & Heath, D., 2007. Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die 1st ed.,
New York: Random House.
Hippel, E.V., 2006. Democratizing Innovation New ed., The Mit Press.
International Telecommunication Union, 2010. Monitoring the WSIS targets, Geneva: Inter-
national Telecommunication Union. Available at:
http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/ind/D-IND-WTDR-2010-PDF-E.pdf
Lester, R.K. & Piore, M.J., 2004. Innovation-The Missing Dimension 1st ed., Harvard Univer-
sity Press.
Lévi-Strauss, C., 1966. The Savage Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Malone, T.W., Laubacher, R. & Dellarocas, C., 2009. Harnessing Crowds: Mapping the
Genome of Collective Intelligence. In Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Collective
Intelligence.
McKinsey Global Institute, 2010. Ten tech-enabled Business Trends to watch. - McKinsey
Quarterly - High Tech - Strategy & Analysis. Available at:
https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/High_Tech/Strategy_Analysis/Clouds_big_
data_and_smart_assets_Ten_tech-enabled_business_trends_to_watch_2647 [Acces-
sed November 8, 2010].
- 21 -
Miniwatts Marketing Group, 2010. World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Popu-
lation Stats. Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm [Accessed
November 19, 2010].
MIT - Center for Collective Intelligence, 2010. MIT - Handbook of Collective Intelligence.
MIT - Handbook of Collective Intelligence. Available at:
http://scripts.mit.edu/~cci/HCI/index.php?title=Main_Page [Accessed Novem-
ber 9, 2010].
Nielsen, 2010. Nielsen NetRatings 2010. Available at: http://en-

us.nielsen.com/content/nielsen/en_us/product_families/nielsen_netratings.html
OECD, 2009. OECD Broadband Portal. OECD Broadband Portal. Available at:
http://www.oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband [Accessed November 6, 2010].
Osterwalder, A. & Pigneur, Y., 2009. Business Model Generation - A Handbook for Visionaries,
Game Changers & Challengers, Zürich: Self Published.
Percy, L. & Elliott, R., 2005. Strategic Advertising Management 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Pisano, G.P. & Verganti, R., 2008. Which Kind of Collaboration Is Right for You? Harvard
Business Review, 86(12), pp.78-86.
Prahalad, C.K. & Ramaswamy, V., 2004. The future of competition, Harvard Business Press.
Solis, B., 2010. The Maturation of Social Media ROI. Mashable/Business. Available at:
http://mashable.com/2010/01/26/maturation-social-media-roi/ [Accessed No-
vember 25, 2010].
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009. Visualised stages of a waste life cycle. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/lifecycle.html [Accessed No-
vember 6, 2010].
Unite For Sight, 2009. Social Investing and Social Return on Investment. Unite For Sight.
Available at: http://www.uniteforsight.org/social-entrepreneurship-
course/module7 [Accessed November 28, 2010].
United Nations, 2010. Trends In Sustainable Development - Towards Sustainable Consumption

And Production, New York: United Nations - Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development.
unkown, 2010. Solution to "critical mass" problem with services needing "network effect"
to work - any case studies? OnStartups - Stack Exchange. Available at:
http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/7063/solution-to-critical-mass-problem-
- 22 -
with-services-needing-network-effect-to-wor [Accessed November 20, 2010].
Veolia Environnement, 2010. Research and Innovation 2010, Paris: Veolia Environnement.
Verganti, R., 2009. Design Driven Innovation: Changing the Rules of Competition by Radically
Innovating What Things Mean, Harvard Business Press.
World Economic Forum, 2010. WEF Risks 2010. Available at:

http://www.weforum.org/documents/riskbrowser2010/risks/# [Accessed No-
vember 19, 2010].
Zuboff, S., 2010. Creating Value in the Age of distributed Capitalism. McKinsey Quarterly -
Strategy - Growth. Available at:
https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Strategy/Growth/Creating_value_in_the_ag
e_of_distributed_capitalism_2666 [Accessed November 7, 2010].
- 23 -
TABLES
Table 1: Critical Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators ................................................ 12!
Table 2: Customer Group/Alternative Solution............................................................................ 29!
Table 3: GWI - Customer Function/Alternative Solution Matrix.................................................. 29!

Table 4: GWI - Customer Function/Group Matrix ...................................................................... 30!
Table 5: Key stakeholders motivations / unmet needs / benefits / prospective ROIs ..................... 32!
FIGURES
Figure 1: Preliminary stakeholdermap for GWI..............................................................................7!
Figure 2: World internet usage and population statistics (Sources: Miniwatts Marketing Group
2010; International Telecommunication Union 2010; Nielsen 2010) .................................8!
Figure 3: Possible GWI User Hierarchy/Funnel (compiled by author) ............................................9!
Figure 4: First draft of a channel strategy for GWI........................................................................ 15!

Figure 5: Time table for GWI introduction campaign ................................................................... 19!
Figure 6: Some rough screenflow sketches.................................................................................... 25!
Figure 7: GWI Goals and Objectives............................................................................................ 26!
Figure 8: Which kind of collaboration is right for you? (Source: Pisano & Verganti 2008) Example
collaboration the waste industry is using today (Source: compiled by author). ................. 27!
Figure 9: GWI-Competition: Platform type vs. functions performed (Source: compiled by author). 28!
Figure 10: Community Lifecycle (Abelson 2010) .......................................................................... 33!
Figure 11: The Steps of an SROI-Analysis (Emerson et al. 2001, p.139 ff.) .................................... 33!
Figure 12: Visualised stages of a waste life cycle (Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
2009) ............................................................................................................................ 34!
Figure 13: Trends, drivers and forces affecting/favouring GlobalWasteIdeas.org........................... 46!
- 24 -
5 Appendix
5.1 Some Screenflow Sketches
"
"
Figure 6: Some rough screenflow sketches
MOCK-UPS
The latest wireframes can always be found on the Pidoco website. Just copy and paste this link:
https://pidoco.com/rabbit/api/prototypes/12913/pages/page0001.xhtml?mode=sketched&api_key=2QrNb66xPVCGGOPHCdY5zojr8xdIQq4oxK
5S92eP
- 25 -
5.2 GWI – Goals and Objectives
GWI shall become a supranational collective (business) intelligence hub, catalyzing bottom-up movements for sustainable
Vision
behaviour in a world where the use of the word waste has become obsolete. XXxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx, xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxx.
To broaden peoples perception of waste as a commodity. We offer a platform that accompanies us to a life with sustain-
Mission
able technologies and holistic ways of consumption. By making waste dealing ideas visible worldwide, we question the
current industrial paradigm of cradle-to-grave and enforce cross-cultural collaboration. At the same time we pragmatically
bridge the time until cradle-to-cradle takes over as the leading industrial paradigm.
P1: We are open. Our Framework can be used by others and we share knowledge.
Principles
P2: We are positivists/possibilists. We see opportunities, no problems.

P3: To innovate we have to stay independent. The only stakeholder group influencing our interests are our users.
User KPIs To become the worlds major, and most used exchange platform for waste issues with over one
Organisational Goals
quantitative
million users within 5–10 years.
Financial KPIs To earn at least a revenue that finances our living expenses plus a compensating interest for aban-
doning our actual professions: XXXXXXXx EUR per person.
General Become the central business intelligence hub for waste related content.
qualitative
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Social Goals To become a central collective intelligence hub putting the dream of a sustainable world into prac-
tice (implementing digital club of Rome).
Becoming an international, for the greater part open, research database that takes up on cultural
practices, geographical conditions, and other frequently overlooked variables, often preventing the
successful implementation of mostly technical innovations regarding waste. ! Showing people that
those innovations usually become more assertive.
To pragmatically bridge the time until the cradle2cradle-vision becomes true and therefore reduce
further harm to our environment.
To put social peer pressure on people (but not a moral one with wagging fingers and moral ser-
mons) and create an change of awareness, as well as actions in people by building on positivism
and the surprising remaining opportunities to solve our problems.
Image The international and cross-cultural grassroots catalyser that brings change in sustainable behav-
iour from bottom up by transferring ideas.
Misc xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Build a developer and PR team until mid of 2011.

Action Field Goals
qualitative
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attract at least 100 disseminators in different countries, spreading our idea and convincing people
quantitative
to become editors for the platform.
Attract 70.000 members in two years after launch.
Being financed in 2011: XXX.XXX EUR p.a.
Figure 7: GWI Goals and Objectives
- 26 -
5.3 Platform Classification and Competition – An Attempt

According to Pisano & Verganti (2008) organisations can make use of four major modes of
collaboration as shown in Figure 8. Within this typology GWI can be characterised as an
innovation community, that it is open to everyone and especially searches for grass-
roots/communities ideas.
!
Figure 8: Which kind of collaboration is right for you? (Source: Pisano & Verganti 2008)
Example collaboration the waste industry is using today (Source: compiled by author).
Our desk research unveiled that the waste industry is not using this collaboration oppor-
tunity yet. Governmental organisations may already experiment with OpenGov-
approaches but they are usually very open and cover such an variety of topics that the idea
collection often looses its focusing. A dedicated innovation community for »waste and con-
sumption« therefore doesn’t exist yet. However, this excludes all general »sustainability
sites« or open challenges on sites like www.openideo.com that cover idea generation on the
topic. So the question is, what idea collection platforms already exist and how do they gen-
erate knowledge? While Dustin Haisler & Margarita Quihuis (2010) roughly distinguish
two distinctly different platforms for idea collection: specific-task motivated-1 and structured-
idea collection platforms2, Daren C. Brabham (2011) structures crowdsourcing approaches
1
These platforms (like Ideascale, Uservoice, etc.) are great a gathering ideas for a specific purpose. For instance, many online voting challen-
ges have adopted these platforms to gather votes for a set period of time. After a user expends their vote or votes they are no longer motivated to
return to the platform aside from seeing what ideas are on top.
2
This type of platform (like Spigit) collects and manages ideas on a board scale within multiple departments of an agency. Unlike the Speci-
fic-Task Motivated Platforms, users are free to submit ideas at any time within multiple departments. Since users are not motivated by
specific-tasks, they must be motivated by a game-mechanics (ranking & rewarding of actions). In this type of platform, ideas are driven by the
participants through an idea funnel.
- 27 -
into four different modes: the knowledge discovery and management approach1, the broadcast
search approach2, the peer-vetted creative production approach3, and distributed human intelligence
tasking4.
GWI therefore is an open innovation community with a flat hierarchy, organised in the form
of a structured-idea collection platform, performing the functions of broadcast search and peer-
vetted creative production. Figure 9 shows those few platforms that are not exclusively dedi-
cated to our topic but which display the greatest overlap in terms of the (customer) func-
tions they perform (cf. Abell 1980). The red area is the competition field that covers func-
tions GWI provides.
GWI-COMPETITION: PLATFORM TYPE VS. FUNCTIONS PERFORMED
Figure 9: GWI-Competition: Platform type vs. functions performed (Source: compiled by author)
1
This approach is useful when knowledge exists in the network (e.g., in written records, prior art, and other published sources) and there is a
need to find and assemble that knowledge in a coherent way in a single location (Peer to Patent Community Patent Review).
2
Broadcast search is useful when an empirically right answer exists and the knowledge of a single expert (or handful of experts) somewhere in
the network is needed to know the answer. Opening up the problem solving process through crowdsourcing is like casting a wide net, hoping
to find the one needle in the haystack (InnoCentive, Goldcorp Challenge).
3
Peer-vetted creative production is useful when there is no empirically right answer, but rather the “right” answer is the one the market will
support. In other words, when the “right” answer is a matter of consumer tastes or user preferences, this approach can help generate and vet
original ideas to find a best choice (Threadless, Next Stop Design).
4
This final approach is useful when online communities are needed to perform tasks that require human intelligence in order to process large
batches of data. Crowdsourcing organizations using this approach need massive amounts of microlabor to crunch large piles of information in
systematic ways, yet computers are not capable of performing these processes (SETI@Home, Amazon Mechanical Turk).
- 28 -
5.4 Market Definition – A Try
GWI – CUSTOMER GROUP/ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION
Table 2: Customer Group/Alternative Solution
GWI – CUSTOMER FUNCTION/ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION
Table 3: GWI - Customer Function/Alternative Solution Matrix
- 29 -
GWI – CUSTOMER FUNCTION (DETAILED)/CUSTOMER GROUP
Table 4: GWI - Customer Function/Group Matrix
- 30 -
5.5 Key Stakeholders
Segmented General Unmet Needs Benefits 38 Comment

ROI
Group/Sector 37 and Insights
Motivation
»General« Escape political We don’t fully Benefit from outside-in / open innovation Examples All the ben-
Industry / and societal know yet. and inspiration (cross industry innovation). (assumptions): efits listed
Manufacturer pressure by Research is here also
showing and needed. Discover/monitor possibilities/solutions for n% cost reduction apply to the
proving the waste-related cost reduction or the like. ! other »in-
organisations Increasing raw material prices: n% reduced CPH dustry seg-
»CSR«. reduce resource dependency/scarcity (cost per hire) for ments«.
finding experts
Find people with whom you can synthesise ideas,
solve problems or simply get advised. free Green-PR
Showcase and present own successes and solutions etc.

and gain positive publicity.
Copy best practices from other market participants
Environmental Keep pace with We don’t fully Discover new business opportunities / markets. n% cost reduction n.a.
Service (cross-) industry know yet. for market re-
Industry innovation Research is Monitor also the (grassroots) market for nearly free. search
speed for needed.
staying profit- Monitor competition. etc.
able and in-
creasing com- Community-led »business intelligence service« with
pany / share- more inspiring and surprising trends than any trend-
holder value scouts could discover.
(some also:
market share).
Search and identify potential partnerships and/or
joint-ventures ! GWI as contact platform.
Private Equity Be the first in To have an Discover »unusual« business/investment opportuni- n% cost reduction n.a.
and Venture the race of easy and ties in early stages – worldwide. for CPA of new
Capital discovering new affordable ventures
Industries business op- way to dis- Easy, fast and »inexpensive« (personnel cost, net-
portunities. cover early work, …) access to innovators and inventors. etc.
business
opportunities Have a specialised grassroots trendscouting plat-
– especially in form. ! Identify emerging industry patterns.
emerging
markets and
in future
industries.
Easy and
inexpensive
access to
potential
founders and
innovators.
NGOs Make own We don’t fully Showcase own achievements and get publicity. … n.a.
contributions know yet.
visible. Research is Get inspired and reuse / alter existing ideas to own
needed. challenges on-site.
See what »competition« is doing.
Problem identification and solution finding. ! GWI

as best practice information database.
Governmental Nurture future We don’t fully Benchmark environmental innovation activities of … n.a.
Organisations industries; know yet. other countries.
strategically set Research is
long-term needed. Observe future trends and directions, worth to
economic support and strengthen also in own country’s busi-
directions and ness development.
impulses;
create general Present »green« image of own country and use data
conditions for
37
To engage oneself with waste and related environmental topics.
38
...e.g. of sponsorship, investments, allowences in kind or subscription to premium membership.
- 31 -
sustainable for place branding activities.

behaviour in all
levels of soci- Present and showcase governmental regulations,
ety. rules and approaches that contribute to a country’s
sustainable total balance.
Raising the general level of awareness in society,

helping government to achieve its environmental
goals.
University and Stay up-to-date We don’t fully Research platform for new trends and technologies. n% time reduction n.a.
Corporate with any tech- know yet. for recruiting a
Research Insti- nological or Research is Place with many kindred-spirited people. sample
tutes social ad- needed.
vancement. Identification of interesting research questions ! etc.
Exchange and GWI as problem identification catalyst.
research inter-
esting data /
phenomena. !
“What is hap-
pening there?”
Special Interest Be up to date We don’t fully New presentation / discussion / network platform / … n.a.
Communities and »fight« for know yet. stage for publicity.
and Movements own ideas. Research is
(Green, Eco, needed. A pragmatic way to act, not just talk... (GWI cases as
Sustainability, ...) blueprints to implement ideas in own action field).
»Ordinary Our assump- We don’t fully Being relieved from a »permanent guilty conscious- … This group is
People« tions: Fun, know yet. ness« by getting to know ways how to make an own the hardest to
(some higher Curiosity and Research is – be it even just a small – contribution. categorise.
others lower Interest, Enter- needed. We doubt if it
tainment, Becoming more aware of environmental issues in makes sense
involved)
»Group Pres- general and regarding the waste problems. at all, trying to
sure«, Incen- describe them
tives, guilty Seeing how to make a difference. in advance.
consciousness,
…? Proudly showcase countries/areas/or own contribu-
tions (promote hometown, own community etc.).
Find like-minded people (e.g. the waste artists).
Table 5: Key stakeholders motivations / unmet needs / benefits / prospective ROIs
- 32 -
5.6 Community Lifecycle
Figure 10: Community Lifecycle (Abelson 2010)
5.7 The Steps of an SROI-Analysis
THE STEPS OF AN SROI-ANALYSIS
According to Emerson et al. (2001, p.139 ff.) we’d have to perform the following steps to really develop reason-
able measures that enable us to calculate GWIs SROI:
1) Examining our »social service activity« (what ever this will be) over a given time frame (usually 5-10 years);
2) Calculating the amount of »investment« required to support that activity
and analysing the capital structure of GWI supporting that activity
3) Identifying the various cost savings, reductions in spending and related benefits (i.e. innovation
and growth opportunities) that accrue as a result of our social service activity;
4) Monetizing those cost savings and related benefits (calculating
the economic value of those costs in real dollar terms);
5) Discounting those savings back to the beginning of the investment timeframe
using a net present value and/or discounted cash flow analysis; and then
6) presenting the socio-economic value created during the investment time frame,
expressing that value in terms of net present value and SROI rates and ratios.
Figure 11: The Steps of an SROI-Analysis (Emerson et al. 2001, p.139 ff.)
- 33 -
5.8 The Waste Life Cycle
Figure 12: Visualised stages of a waste life cycle (Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2009)
- 34 -
5.9 Some Case Studies
5.9.1 SKELETON SEA
BACKGROUND
A group of three surfers realized that their favourite surfing spot in the Azores became
more and more littered, thus they started collecting trash from the ocean. After separating
the waste, a pile of flip-flops reminded them of the skin of a fish. In a 24 hours session they
built a fish right on the beach. When asked what to do with it by the local people, they an-
swered that they would release it into the sea.
CHALLENGE
Next to toxic materials, plastic waste is the biggest threat to the oceans. Because plastic
does not decompose, every single plastic particle will stay in the water for good and will
inevitable find its way back to its maker. "We want to raise awareness for a cleaner ocean.
Plastic does not disappear in the water. It takes a flip-flop 1000 years to disappear. By now,
the constant flow of human garbage reaches the deepest and most remote regions on this
planet. According to UNO statistics, every square kilometre of ocean contains 120,000
pieces of floating plastic. In certain parts of the ocean, there is six times more plastic than
plankton. And yet, macro-waste is still not classified as pollution by law. Mankind turns
the sea into a giant waste bin.
IDEA
Using waste that has been collected from the oceans as an artwork raw-material
IMPLEMENTATION
Three European surfers, who work as artists, create sea-life sculptures and exhibit them
publicly or release them to the oceans.
IMPACT
Raising awareness on ocean pollution. The artwork is presented on several art-exhibitions

worldwide. In 2010 "The Aquarium" in the Basque town of San Sebastian showed 20
pieces of the artists. More than 3,500 visitors and enormous media attention through Span-
ish TV and newspapers, helped spreading the message of "keeping the oceans clean!", to an
even wider audience.
www.skeletonsea.com
- 35 -
- 36 -
5.9.2 BIOMER PLASTICS REPROCESSING (BPR)
BACKGROUND
BPR claims our perception of waste as merely rubbish and not as a valuable commodity to
be the biggest obstacle solving our waste problem.
The UK is still one of the biggest contributor for the amount of waste entering landfills in
the EU. More than half of consumer goods are packaged in plastic. Currently the vast ma-
jority of plastics are shipped to Hong Kong, before reprocessed in China.
CHALLENGE
The challenge is twofold. On the one hand, due to the decline in mining industry in the
UK, people in the Rother Valley face unemployment, loss of livelihood and social prob-
lems. On the other hand, it is to find a substitute for shipping used consumer goods that
contain PET abroad, by taking part in the PET reprocessing market.
IDEA
BPR takes a common PET plastic bottle and upcycles it into biodegradable plastic pellets
which are used to manufacture medical equipment or perishable food packaging.
IMPLEMENTATION
BPR is currently seeking funding to build a test facility near Sheffield, United Kingdom.
The valley was the industrial heartland of mining, before rapid decline after the events of
the miners strikes in the 1980s.
IMPACT
A clean, cost effective plastic recycling that stimulates local economies.
no website available yet
- 37 -
- 38 -
5.9.3 FERTILOO & PEEPOOPLE
BACKGROUND
According to the WHO, more than three billion people in the world have no access to im-
proved sanitation. As a consequence open defecation is widely practiced, contaminating
water-sources and spreading preventable water-born diseases.
CHALLENGE
Industrial sanitation solutions are too expensive for developing countries and often disre-
gard local sanitation habits.
IDEA
Both ideas give access to improved sanitation by designing a low-tech solution.
Peepoople is a biodegradable slim bag which is used as a mobile toilet. An inside layer of
sterile material prevents all contact with the excrement and guarantees the bag to be odor-
free for at least 24 hours.
The Fertiloo is a light-weight compost latrine which is installed at Kenyan farms. Its design
considers traditional sanitation habits and human waste can later be used as fertilizer.
IMPLEMENTATION
Peepoople AB was founded 2006 and is based in Stockholm, Sweden. Research for the
Peepoo toilet has been conducted in cooperation with the Swedish University of Agricultu-
ral Science and the Royal Institute of Technology. It will be available in late-2010.
The Fertiloo was designed by the Kenyan social entrepreneur organization Nuru and costs
less than $100, which is the amount of money saved by not having to buy industrial fer-
tilizer.
IMPACT
Safely collecting and reusing human waste not only reduces family health expenses and
improves quality of life, but also helps saving 20% of their annual income currently spent
on industrial fertilizer and top soil.
www.peepoople.com | no website for Fertiloo available yet
- 39 -
- 40 -
5.9.4 CIUDAD SALUDABLE – HEALTHY CITY39
BACKGROUND
Solid waste management is a serious problem in Peru. Before Ciudad Saludable started its
work, some 1.000 tons of garbage were being generated daily in Cono Norte, one of Lima’s
largest slums. Only half of it got collected by official municipal workers. Remainders usu-
ally were left to accumulate in stinking waste heaps or strewn along public roads and in
vacant lots. Furthermore waste often gets dumped into rivers, contaminating the drinking
sources for many poor families. This situation exists in towns throughout the country.
CHALLENGE
People neither wanted to or couldn’t afford to pay for public waste collection nor had they
an awareness of its importance on health issues. Levels of education are low while unem-
ployment and poverty are usually very high.
IDEA
Ciudad Saludable turned these problems into an profitable opportunity. By working in
partnership with municipalities, it brought over 1.500 waste collectors in those slums into
employment. Their work in return steadily improved health and living conditions for the
over 6 million disadvantaged people living in these areas.
IMPLEMENTATION
Ciudad Saludable provides highly efficient »low-tech trash collection and processing« as
well as waste management services that are more dependable and less expensive than those
provided by municipal governments. It encourages people to pay a modest fee by using
creative and educating marketing incentives that emphasise the health benefits of waste
collection. Paying customers sometimes get rewarded by planting trees in front of their
houses and prompt payers even receive gifts such as kitchen baskets.
IMPACT
6 Million peoples living conditions have been improved, thousands of jobs were generated
and the general level of education and awareness regarding the reasonable handling of
waste raised remarkably. While in upscale suburbs where the city government collects the
trash, waste collection payment rates are below 40%, the rates in Ciudad Saludable’s mi-
croenterprises districts are over 80% now.
www.ciudadsaludable.org
39
Sources: Schwab Foundation (2010), Ciudad Saludable (2010)
- 41 -
- 42 -
TRENDS AFFECTING/FAVORING GLOBALWASTEIDEAS.ORG
Identified forces/crucibles, where the stresses and tensions will be greatest and thus offer the richest opportunities for companies to innovate and change.
Level Trend Area Trend Label Short Description Source Impact on GWI / Implication / Importance
40 GWIs Impact on Trend
(Drivers ) Criterion Criterion
Meta-Trends not relevant not relevant not relevant - not relevant
Mega-Trends McKinsey The great rebalancing The coming decade will be the first in 200 years when emerging-market countries Bisson et al. We need to observe these markets and learn *** +
Key global contribute more growth than the developed ones. This growth will not only create a 2010 with/from them and their (low-tech) innova-
Trends wave of new middle-class consumers but also drive profound innovations in product tions.
design, market infrastructure, and value chains.
The productivity imperative Developed-world economies will need to generate pronounced gains in productivity Bisson et al. Innovate better, collaborate closer, etc. ** -
to power continued economic growth. The most dramatic innovations in the Western 2010
world are likely to be those that accelerate economic productivity.
The global grid The global economy is growing ever more connected. Complex flows of capital, Bisson et al. GWI is part of the grid / … * --
goods, information, and people are creating an interlinked network that spans 2010
geographies, social groups, and economies in ways that permit large-scale interac-
tions at any moment. This expanding grid is seeding new business models and
accelerating the pace of innovation. It also makes destabilizing cycles of volatility
more likely.
- 44 -
Pricing the planet A collision is shaping up among the rising demand for resources, constrained sup- Bisson et al. Invention of new models of cooperation *** ++
plies, and changing social attitudes toward environmental protection. The next 2010 between government and business?
decade will see an increased focus on resource productivity, the emergence of
Unit 5G4140 – Strategie Planning for Digital Marketing Communication
substantial clean-tech industries, and regulatory initiatives.
The market state The often contradictory demands of driving economic growth and providing the Bisson et al. * --
necessary safety nets to maintain social stability have put governments under 2010
extraordinary pressure. Globalization applies additional heat: how will distinctly
national entities govern in an increasingly globalized world?
Environ- Growing demand Even the most conservative projections for global economic growth over the next Bisson et al. Pressure on commodity markets forces *** ++
mental decade suggest that demand for oil, coal, iron ore, and other natural resources will 2010 companies to innovate with materials, manu-
Trends rise by at least a third. About 90 percent of that increase will come from growth in facturing processes, recycling processes, etc.
emerging markets.
40
Drivers can be »PESTLE« and usually bring these trends forwards.
Constrained supply As easy-to-tap and high-quality reserves are depleted, supply will come from harder- Bisson et al. Need to reuse / responsible use of raw ma- * --
to-access, more costly, and more politically unstable environments. 2010 terials.
Increased regulatory Around the world, political leaders, regulators, scientific experts, and consumers are Bisson et al. Companies need to be proactive / gov- *** ++
and social scrutiny gravitating to a new consensus that is based on fostering environmental sustaina- 2010 ernments have to monitor developments /
bility. Climate change may be the most highly charged and visible battleground, but regulatory schemes will disrupt entire value
other issues loom: water scarcity, pollution, food safety, and the depletion of global chains
fishing stocks, among other things. For businesses, this new sensibility will present
itself in two ways: stricter environmental regulations and increasing demands from
consumers—and employees—that companies demonstrate greater environmental
responsibility.
Socio- Socio- Blurring boundaries * --

cultural political between responsibilities
Trends Trends
and laws
Butterfly effect *** ++
Discontinuities in demo- * --
graphics and resources
Growing safety, security *** ++

concerns; sensitivity to risk
Rising inequality * --
- 45 -
Shifting values, social *** ++
norms
Ubiquity of technology * --
Technologi- McKinsey Distributed co-creation The power of the social Web is changing not only how companies connect with McKinsey *** ++
cal Trends Tech Trends moves into the main- customers, but also how they actually make money. McKinsey notes that 70 percent Global Institute
2010 stream of senior executives report their companies regularly “created value through Web 2010
communities.” One good example: Intuit puts its best users to work in customer
support by creating a warm and cosy place for people to share problems and solu-
tions — and cutting support costs by 90 percent.
Making the network, the Making the network, the organization. McKinsey says Dow Chemical, for example, McKinsey GWI could be a good source to recruit and * --
organisation has set up its own social network “to help managers identify the talent they need to Global Institute collaborate…
execute projects across different business units and functions.” Dow has even 2010
extended the network to include retired employees.” Failing to take advantage of
your extended network of resources, McKinsey warns, limits your ability “to tackle
increasingly complex challenges.”
Wiring for a sustainable “Clearly,” McKinsey says, “environmental stewardship and sustainability are C-level McKinsey *** ++
world agenda topics.” Professionals can expect to be involved in developing new manage- Global Institute
ment systems designed to continuously track and improve resource use and the 2010
impact on earnings.
The age of the multi-sided MasterCard, for instance, has built a consulting unit based on the data it gathers McKinsey * --
business model from its card users. And companies like Skype are free for many in order to provide Global Institute
paid, premium services to a few. Finance and accounting professionals s should be 2010
asking: Who might find our data valuable? What would happen if we gave away our
product for free? What if a competitor did so first? It happened to newspapers when
the Internet came along, could it happen to you?
Innovating from the Established multinational companies are finding new challenges from the smallest McKinsey *** ++
bottom of the pyramid entrepreneurs in the furthest places. China, for instance, hosts Alibaba, a 30-million Global Institute
member business exchange to expedite connections between manufacturers and 2010
customers. GE is locating new research centers in Asia and Africa to find upstarts
early.
Producing public good on McKinsey states flatly: “The role of governments in shaping global economic policy McKinsey * --
the grid will expand in coming years.” And it will be enabled by new technologies. Profession- Global Institute
als can expect to see “novel, unfamiliar collaborations among governments, technol- 2010
ogy providers, other businesses, nongovernmental organizations and citizens.”
Change of Citizen R&D Self-explanatory ! no description *** ++
- 46 -
Manufactur-
Networked artisans Self-explanatory ! no description * --
41
ing
Personal design Self-explanatory ! no description *** ++
and fabrication
Grassroots economics From products to stories * --
If you can’t open it, you From closed IP to open innovation * --

don’t own it
Consumer - - - - - - -
Trends
Fashion not relevant not relevant not relevant - not relevant
Trends
Figure 13: Trends, drivers and forces affecting/favouring GlobalWasteIdeas.org
41
Drivers: rise of the professional amateur, eco-motivation, platforms for socialbility, access to tools, open source everything, quest for authenticity

GWI Online Marketing Concept - A Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GWI Online Marketing Concept - A Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Manchester, December 6, 2010

Unit 5G4140 – Strategic Planning for Digital Marketing Communication

»Digital Marketing « Plan

Jan Schmiedgen Student ID 10980834 (3rd Semester)

Saved at: DATEN:Dropbox:S_Shared Projects:G_GlobalWasteIdeas:F_Final Concept Documents:GWI-OnlineMarketing-Concept.doc

Jan Schmiedgen, December 6, 2010

2! Techniques and Requirements............................................10!

1 Challenges and Objectives

GENERAL BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT CHALLENGES

Figure 1: Preliminary stakeholdermap for GWI

1.2 Limitations and Technical Requirements

WORLD INTERNET USAGE AND POPULATION STATISTICS

Figure 2: World internet usage and population statistics

1.3 Communication Objectives

Figure 3: Possible GWI User Hierarchy/Funnel (compiled by author)

2 Techniques and Requirements

STARTING AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE BUT NOT SIMPLER

2.2 Critiqual Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators

Supporting people in the fast establishment of peer-connections, nCase inspiration connections

Table 1: Critical Success Factors and Key Performance Indicators

2.3 The ROI-Question

Figure 4: First draft of a channel strategy for GWI

BLOGOSPHERE AND SPECIAL INTEREST NEWS SERVICES

PROFESSIONAL MEDIA RELATIONS

GENERAL »OFFLINE INTEGRATION«

THE LANDING PAGES

FURTHER GENERAL THINGS TO CONSIDER

3.2 Offline Integration

3.3 Media Planning

Figure 5: Time table for GWI introduction campaign

Betancourt, L., 2009. 10 Rules for Increasing Community Engagement. Mashable/Business.

Betancourt, L., 2010. 8 Things to Avoid When Building a Community. Mashable/Business.

Braungart, M. & McDonough, W., 2009. Cradle to Cradle, London: Vintage.

Daren C. Brabham, 2011. Crowdsourcing: A model for leveraging online communities -

Nielsen, 2010. Nielsen NetRatings 2010. Available at: http://en-

United Nations, 2010. Trends In Sustainable Development - Towards Sustainable Consumption

with-services-needing-network-effect-to-wor [Accessed November 20, 2010].

World Economic Forum, 2010. WEF Risks 2010. Available at:

Table 3: GWI - Customer Function/Alternative Solution Matrix.................................................. 29!

Figure 3: Possible GWI User Hierarchy/Funnel (compiled by author) ............................................9!

Figure 4: First draft of a channel strategy for GWI........................................................................ 15!

Figure 6: Some rough screenflow sketches.................................................................................... 25!

Figure 7: GWI Goals and Objectives............................................................................................ 26!

Figure 10: Community Lifecycle (Abelson 2010) .......................................................................... 33!

5.1 Some Screenflow Sketches

Figure 6: Some rough screenflow sketches

5.2 GWI – Goals and Objectives

P2: We are positivists/possibilists. We see opportunities, no problems.

million users within 5–10 years.

Build a developer and PR team until mid of 2011.

to become editors for the platform.

Attract 70.000 members in two years after launch.

Being financed in 2011: XXX.XXX EUR p.a.

Figure 7: GWI Goals and Objectives

5.3 Platform Classification and Competition – An Attempt

GWI-COMPETITION: PLATFORM TYPE VS. FUNCTIONS PERFORMED

5.4 Market Definition – A Try

GWI – CUSTOMER GROUP/ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION

Table 2: Customer Group/Alternative Solution

GWI – CUSTOMER FUNCTION/ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION

Table 3: GWI - Customer Function/Alternative Solution Matrix

GWI – CUSTOMER FUNCTION (DETAILED)/CUSTOMER GROUP

Table 4: GWI - Customer Function/Group Matrix

5.5 Key Stakeholders