the weekly ramble

What do 21 and 6,000 have in common?

Hint – it’s not sudoku….

Another hint – they are compelling examples of the true power of the social effect.

Still no?

OK – here goes.

21 refers to lives saved and 6,000 is a number of donations.

In both cases the human desire to share and act was enabled and amplified by digital channels and sharing tools – share and act – real engagement.  Outcome engagement.

Ayelet Galena fought a brave fight for life supported by thousands, online, every day – most of whom had never met her. Ayelet was only two when her brave little heart gave out last week – but her struggle had already saved 21 people, by last week, as her plight had brought new potential donors to the Bone Marrow Transplant registry at Gift of Life and 21 new matches were identified and acted on. Outcome.

6,000 is the number of new donations (smaller ones) that Planned Parenthood in the United States received, last week, during a particularly contentious debate around the catalyst of one of their historic funding sources deciding to end their association. While the ether audibly buzzed with supporters for both sides of the argument – some people acted and between them and some major donors the amount in question was more than made up for. And – the decision was reversed and the original funding restored. Outcome.

Let’s be clear – I have no doubt that some people don’t like the idea of registries that hold our genetic code, and there are also many who don’t support Planned Parenthood. I am not advocating here and my personal views are irrelevant to my point – so please if you are side-specific passionate, have that debate someplace else. My point is simply about what leads to real Outcomes.

I was interviewed by Bloomberg Businessweek, last week, their focus being Google, data sharing and the future. My point was around motivation – the one missing link in all algorithms – you know what I did – you know what others did – but you don’t know why –  and it’s the why that leads to outcomes and not just to clicks and tricks.

My POV has always been that the why is related to our human DNA-ingrained behavior that goes back to Adam needing Eve and she getting bored and talking to the snake. But jokes aside – it is clear that Outcomes of the highest nature have always been linked to social networking – even pre-digital.

Listen:

“Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.”
- Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 4:8 (37a)

Think on that – the power of one to influence the world – to destroy and to save –  now amplified by Facebook and other digital stuff.

Powerful…think of the social effect – you can envision what it looks like – one leads to many – and it’s our choice to take it up or down…

In memory of Ayelet and in support of the 21….

What do you think?