Sunday, July 27, 2014

Using social media to innovate service delivery – one size does not fit all

Digital government policy analyst, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

When I think about social media use to improve service delivery, I intuitively think about the likes of Apple, Google or Amazon. And the way in which they use people's own social media footprint as an advertising space (surely I am not the only one who at least once posted that message Amazon suggests after your purchase, the one that lets you share your purchase with your Facebook friends and Twitter followers).
But actually my whole service environment taps into social media to improve their services, not only the Internet heavyweights. Take the world's main retailers - WalMart, Tesco, Carrefour - their use of social media to make their services stand out is astonishing. But small vendors too benefit from this new channel to engage their clients. I for example buy all my meat with a local seller whose source is a small community of farmers. Just like the business itself, its social media footprint is rather small, but the blog and RSS feed are enough to keep me and other clients in the loop about the upcoming deliveries, the farmers and the animals, new recipes, etc.
So how does the public sector use social media to innovate its services? It's probably fair to say that the public sector has not been a pioneer in this field. This was mostly the role of techies, extroverts, journalists and big businesses. But just like my local meat seller found a way to leverage social media for sales, many government institutions have found their way around too. It's not by accident that some national governments today instantly and directly reach large parts of their population.
Making public services more competitive – the German public employment service provider
For public service delivery agencies, the added value of using social media can be to make their services stand out in an environment of competition. Of course you know – and you can surely cite a few more of the thousands of digital outlets that today match those that offer a job with those that are looking for one. These businesses compete with providers of public employment services (PES). And in many countries they seem to do that rather well, e.g. in France where the PES Pôle Emploi advertises the equivalent of only 15.8% of all vacancies filled across the economy (2010 data).
Also facing “market pressures”, the German PES provider (Bundesagentur für Arbeit, BA) took a step back to reflect on how it can use social media to support its mission of bringing people into work. It identified a convenient win-win opportunity for cooperation with the social platformXing (a LinkedIn competitor for professional networking and very popular in German-speaking countries). Since 2012 employers who post a vacancy on Xing can tick a checkbox to publicise their vacancy at the BA’s online jobs database “JobbörseJobbörse users are in turn routed to Xing where they can engage with other users, for example to find out more about the vacancy or the employer.
Creating communities of trust – the Spanish national police force
Social media also help the public sector create communities of mutual trust. The Spanish national police force (Cuerpo Nacional de Policía de España) illustrates this potential because they launched a successful (and now globally acknowledged) social media journey in a relatively challenging environment of frustration over the country's economic situation and over people's future prospects:
In 2009 the Spanish national police committed to using social media as an additional lever to improve their services. The commitment was backed up with financial and human resources, notably the recruitment of a social media expert, Carlos Fernandez, to lead the effort. Today, a dedicated team uses various channels 17 hours a day (from 8am to 1pm) to inform the public and to prevent, dissuade and combat crime. Their most popular channels are Twitter (over 900k followers), Facebook (over 145k likes) and YouTube (over 5 million video views). Obviously these numbers do not take into account the snowball effects once some of the police's messages turn viral on the web.
But how does this innovate the police's core services? Building a social media "fan base" and creating viral messages are only intermediate steps towards mission-critical successes. One of those was the recent arrest of a convicted murderer who had been on the loose for months: on 14 January 2014 the Spanish national police launched a coordinated media campaign with heavy use of social media to diffuse photos and information about the wanted individual. The posts went viral and people’s reports that followed led to the arrest of the convict later the same day
View image on Twitter
Buscamos a este asesino, José Manuel García, 24 años. AVÍSANOS a o al teléfono 915822516

These few illustrations hardly capture the vast opportunities and challenges for the public sector in this field. But they do underline that successful innovation starts from the mission and purpose of the institution, not from a given channel or technology. Social media use can spur service innovation, but "one size does not fit all", meaning what works in one institution is not guaranteed to bring success elsewhere: for the German public employment service provider, social media use has been very selective and involved turning a potential competitor into a partner;  for the Spanish national police force social media use covers a wide range of tactics and tools to build communities of confidence over a long term. And for the small business that sells the meat I regularly buy social media use is as simple as maintaining a newsletter and blog to diffuse information to existing customers and maybe attract a few new ones.
We will soon publish a discussion paper that explores in more depth how the public sector can use social media to support its diverse missions. It will be ready in time for the OECD E-Leaders 2014 meeting. Keep in touch via @OECDgov.

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Mengapa hasil (dan inisiatif sejenisnya) dapat dipercaya
Maruli Manurung

Kemarin (Rabu 16 Juli 2014) saya menulis sebuah catatan di Facebook berjudul “Membedah pembedahan keanehan website” (yang sekarang sudah saya tayangkan kembali di blog ini atas saran beberapa rekan), karena saya tergelitik untuk membahas sebuah artikel di yang berusaha mendiskreditkan salah satu usaha crowdsourcing data entry form C1 yang sangat sukses,
Sama sekali saya tidak menyangka bahwa artikel ini akan begitu banyak di-likedan di-share. Padahal saya menulis artikel itu dalam kondisi agak terburu-buru dan isinya pun berupa sanggahan terhadap poin-poin yang menurut saya hanyalah isu yang tidak terlalu penting, seperti registrasi domain privat, salah mengambil asumsi waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk memasukkan data, dan akses ke subdomain Sebetulnya, ada banyak aspek mengenai inisiatif seperti yang jauh lebih fundamental dan penting untuk dibahas.
Hari ini sudah muncul beberapa artikel lain yang senada dengan artikel di, misalnya iniini, dan ini. Selain itu, muncul juga seri “kultwit” sepertidi sini dan di sini.
Kalau saya harus bedah semuanya satu per satu bisa pingsan saya. Banyak “argumen” yang digunakan artikel-artikel ini berakar dari kesalahpahaman dan ketidakmampuan (atau jangan-jangan kesengajaan) dalam memaknai hasil yang dilaporkan oleh, padahal di situs itu sudah ada catatan jelas yang menyatakan bahwa hasil yang dilaporkan (i) merupakan hasil sementara yang terus di-update seiring dengan masuknya data baru, dan (ii) jumlah suara sah yang dilaporkan merupakan jumlah nilai yang tertera pada formulir C1 yang memang mungkin salah (hal ini memang dilakukan secara sengaja oleh pengembang sistem supaya kejanggalan pada formulir C1 dapat terdeteksi secara otomatis).
Nah, sama seperti pada masa kampanye sebelum 9 Juli, daripada berbicara dengan nada negatif, yaitu membantah dan menyanggah tudingan-tudingan pada tautan-tautan di atas, lebih baik saya berbicara dengan nada positif, dan menjelaskan kelebihan, kekuatan, dan manfaat inisiatif crowdsourcing seperti,, solusirfid/pemiluc1,, dst.
Mari kita mulai.

Satu hal yang paling berharga dari inisiatif crowdsourcing seperti,,, dan adalah keterbukaannya. Setiap sistem menyediakan fasilitas untuk menelusuri hasil data entry yang dilakukan, dimulai dari tingkat nasional, di mana kita bisa memilih untuk drill down sampai ke tingkat provinsi, kabupaten, kecamatan, kelurahan, bahkan sampai ke TPS. Dari situ, kita bisa melakukan verifikasi dengan hasil scan formulir C1 yang ada di website KPU. Artinya, tuduhan-tuduhan bahwa hasil yang dilaporkan inisiatif-inisiatif ini dimanipulasi sama sekali tidak berdasar. Kalaupun kita mengambil worst case scenario dan berasumsi bahwa (i) pemiliknya berpihak pada capres tertentu, (ii) programnya secara sistematis memanipulasi hasil, dan/atau (iii) ada relawan entry data yang sengaja memasukkan data salah, yang paling penting adalah kita bisa memverifikasi sendiri apakah datanya benar atau tidak. Seperti saya katakan pada artikel sebelumnya: Jangan lihat orangnya. Lihat datanya (dan tolong kalau lihat datanya, pastikan anda sudah terlebih dahulu memahami bagaimana menginterpretasikannya, jangan sampai capek-capek bikin “kultwit” hanya karena tidak membaca keterangan di bagian footer halaman
Bandingkan dengan klaim Marwah Daud pada 12 Juli yang mengatakan bahwa hasil real count timses Prabowo menunjukkan kemenangan dengan margin 7%. Sama sekali tidak ada info konkrit mengenai detil di belakang klaim ini. Konon kabarnya ini diperoleh dari penghitungan di Kertanegara Center, Cikeas Center, dan saksi PKS. Yang pertama, saya coba cari keterangan di Google, tapi sama sekali tidak ada informasi detil tentang hasil real count dari Kertanegara Center. Yang kedua sudah dibantah oleh Jubir SBY, bahwa tidak ada tabulasi hasil Pilpres 2014 yang dilakukan di Cikeas, dan yang ketiga, well, no comment deh…

Dengan cara mengajak dan melibatkan masyarakat secara langsung, inisiatif ini telah memberdayakan masyarakat yang tadinya mungkin sudah mulai ragu dan bingung melihat hasil quick count yang berbeda-beda.
Hal ini tidak lepas dari kebijakan KPU untuk menerapkan ide Open Data dengan memberikan akses sepenuhnya terbuka terhadap hasil scan formulir C1, rekap DA1, dan rekap DB1. Sungguh mengharukan melihat daftar inisiatif yang muncul dengan spontanitas:
Beberapa pengembang sistem-sistem di atas saling berbagi source code di Github, berbagi data melalui API dan database dump, dan berbagi informasi melalui berbagai forum diskusi. Sepertinya tanpa disadari, KPU telah membantu menyelenggarakan hackathon 12 hari yang paling dahsyat sepanjang sejarah!
Sebagai akibatnya, ini memberikan pesan yang jelas kepada masyarakat: “Ini suara anda! Ini Pemilu anda!”, sehingga hasil akhirnya nanti tidak lagi akan diterima dengan keraguan maupun kecurigaan.
Beberapa pihak meragukan bahwa relawan benar-benar bekerja tanpa imbalan. Hari gini gratisan input? masak sih?” atau “Adakah relawan yang mau mengerjakan hal seperti ini?”, mereka bertanya. Saya rasa jawabannya adalah ya. Seperti yang sudah saya sampaikan di artikel sebelumnya, faktor motivasi dan insentif merupakan salah satu faktor kunci keberhasilan dari suatu inisiatif crowdsourcing, namun insentifnya tidak harus finansial. Fenomena ini sudah banyak dibahas di kalangan akademis (contohnya di sinidan di sini).

Sahabat-sahabat yang mengikuti newsfeed saya di Facebook mungkin sudah akrab dengan cerita ini, tetapi saya tetap ingin menceritakannya lagi di sini, karena mengilustrasikan betapa cepatnya komunitas bisa bergerak.
Pada tanggal 11 Juli saya menuangkan ke dalam sebuah tulisan beberapa pemikiran mengenai sistem crowdsourcing untuk data entry formulir C1, dan keesokan paginya saya mengunggahnya ke Google Docs dan membagikannya di Facebook. Dalam waktu kurang dari 1 jam, dokumen ini sudah dibaca dan dikomentari oleh beberapa pihak yang secara terpisah juga memikirkan dan mengembangkan sistem serupa, di antaranya Ainun Najib (, Aditya Liviandi ( dan Pahlevi Fikri Auliya (, dan belakangan juga dengan Reza Lesmana ( Kita sempat bertukar pikiran. Dalam kurun waktu 3-4 jam, Pahlevi sudah mengimplementasikan sebuah sistem eksperimental berdasarkan rancangan tersebut di Fiturnya belum lengkap (ingat: 3-4 jam!), tapi pada dasarnya sudah bisa dipakai. Saya lalu membagikan informasi tentang site tersebut pada Sabtu malam. Di luar dugaan, sistem ini langsung go viral, dan dalam waktu beberapa jam saja ada sekitar 500 orang yang sudah mendaftar dan membantu melakukan data entry. Progressnya luar biasa cepat, sampai ada 17 ribu form C1 yang diproses hanya dalam beberapa jam. Sekitar tengah malam — dan dengan pertimbangan yang matang — sistemnya ditutup oleh Pahlevi. Alasannya bisa dibaca diwebsite-nya, dan saya bisa memahami dan memakluminya. Tapi kronologi kejadian yang merentang 15 jam berupa eksperimen “kolaborasi kilat” itu (yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang yang belum pernah bertemu sebelumnya) semakin meyakinkan saya bahwa pendekatan crowdsourcing ini memiliki potensi yang sangat ampuh.
Berdasarkan pengalaman pribadi ini, saya sama sekali tidak heran melihat yang bisa menyelesaikan entry data untuk >95% formulir C1 dalam 5 hari, padahal beberapa pihak (contohnya ini dan ini) menjadikan kecepatan ini sebagai dasar untuk meragukan keabsahan proses dan luaran dari sistem

Dalam metodologi penelitian, terutama yang kualitatif, seringkali dua atau lebih metode diterapkan dalam suatu studi untuk menguji validitas suatu kesimpulan. Semakin banyak hasil independen yang berakhir pada kesimpulan yang sama, semakin tinggi derajat keyakinan kita akan kesimpulan tersebut. Kita semua menyadari bahwa hanya ada satu Official Count, yaitu hasil perhitungan resmi yang dilakukan oleh KPU. Saya termasuk yang percaya sepenuhnya pada integritas dan profesionalisme KPU dalam menyelenggarakan Pemilu, dan yakin bahwa hasil yang akan diumumkan nanti pada tanggal 22 Juli adalah hasil yang merefleksikan suara rakyat Indonesia yang sebenarnya. Namun demikian, kita semua akan semakin yakin kalau ternyata ada beberapa — tidak hanya 2, tapi mungkin 3, 4, bahkan lebih — sumber data lain yang konvergen pada hasil yang sama. Seperti apa hasilnya? Mari kita lihat gambar berikut, sekaligus saya pikir ini adalah momen yang tepat untuk mengakhiri pemaparan ini. Silahkan disimak:
Perbandingan beberapa hitungan, baik realcount versi crowdsourcing, versi timses, maupun quick count (Sumber: Merlyna Lim)

Friday, July 18, 2014

Short List of Fallacies
 Nathaniel Bluedorn
This material is taken from the book The Fallacy Detective.

Avoiding the Question

1. Red Herring: Where someone introduces an irrelevant point into an argument. He may think (or he may want us to think) it proves his side, but it really doesn’t.
  • Grizzly bears can’t be dangerous – they look so cute.
  • When the presidential candidate was asked whether he’d name as a running mate someone who was opposed to abortion, he replied: “It would be incredibly presumptive for someone who has yet to earn his party’s nomination to be picking a vice president. However, the main criterion I would use in choosing a running mate would be whether the person was capable of being president.”
2. Ad Hominem: Where someone attacks an opponent’s character, or his motives for believing something, instead of disproving his opponent’s argument.
  • Jenny: “My uncle says that all murderers should be put to death because then nobody would want to murder anybody anymore.” Sylvia: “Wasn’t your uncle in jail once? I don’t think that we can trust somebody’s opinion who was once a criminal.”
  • I know everybody thinks Einstein’s theory of relativity is correct, but I can’t accept it. Einstein believed in evolution.
3. Genetic Fallacy: Where someone condemns an argument because of where it began, how it began, or who began it.
  • Jenny: “I think abortion is the murder of innocent children.” Clyde: “The only reason why you disagree with abortion is because you were abused as a child and you have never recovered from it.”
  • Bert: “Mr Gritchus, why do you always wear suspenders and never a belt?” Mr Gritchus: “Because belts were developed in the military centuries ago and were used by soldiers. Since the military is evil, and belts came from the military, therefore I can’t wear a belt.”
4. Tu Quoque (You Too): Where someone dismisses your viewpoint on an issue because you are yourself inconsistent in that very thing.
  • Fred: “I wouldn’t smoke cigarettes if I were you. It is a bad habit and it will bring you all kinds of problems.” Jake: “Don’t tell me not to smoke. You do it, too.”
  • “I don’t see what is wrong with speeding – everybody does it.”
5. Faulty Appeal to Authority: Where someone appeals to the authority of someone who has no special knowledge in the area they are discussing.
  • My car mechanic says the best way to fix computer problems is to just give the computer a good, sharp kick.
  • Bert: “I’ve been homeschooled all of my life, and I think it has helped me out a lot.” Clyde: “The man who has the highest IQ in the world said he didn’t think homeschooling turned out good citizens. He said he didn’t think homeschoolers received enough socialization, so they will become social misfits. Do you still think homeschooling is a good idea?”
6. Appeal to the People: Where someone claims his viewpoint is correct just because many other people agree with it.
  • Political Candidate: “My opponent says abortion is murder – despite the fact that a recent poll concluded 76% of Americans believe an abortion does not murder an innocent child.”
  • It looks as if more people vacation in Florida than any other place. It must be the nicest place in America to visit.

Making Assumptions

1. Circular Reasoning: Where someone attempts to prove his conclusion by simply restating it. He says “P is true because Q is true, and Q is true because P is true.”
  • Jimmy: Dad, why do I have to learn logic? Dad: Because it will help to develop your mind. Jimmy: Why will it develop my mind? Dad: Because it will help you think better.
2. Equivocation: Where the meaning of a word is changed in the middle of an argument.
  • If the English don’t drive on the right side of the road, what are they doing on the wrong side?
  • Dad: “Son, when you grow up I want you to always be a responsible young man.” Son: “But Dad, I am already very responsible. Whenever something breaks around here, it seems as if I am always responsible.”
3. Loaded Question: Where someone asks one question which assumes the answer to a second question.
  • Neighbor: “Why do you like to disturb the neighborhood by playing your music so loud everybody can hear it a mile away?” [Does the neighbor really like to disturb the neighborhood?]
  • Judge: “Have you stopped beating your poor dog yet?” [Has he ever begun beating his dog?]
4. Part-to-Whole: Where someone asserts that what is true of part of something must also be true of the whole thing together.
  • Child: “Mommy, why is this feather pillow so heavy? It only has feathers in it and little feathers weigh hardly anything.”
  • If I can break this bunch of sticks, one by one, Mommy, why can’t I break a bunch of sticks together?
5. Whole-to-Part: Where someone asserts that what is true of something as a whole must also be true of each of its parts. This is the reverse of the part-to-whole fallacy.
  • If our bag of potato chips won’t float when I throw it in the pond, why will one of my potato chips float by itself?
  • If I can’t break this bunch of sticks, all at once, Mommy, shouldn’t I be able to break each individual stick?
6. Either-Or: Where someone asserts that we must chose between two things, when in fact we have more alternatives.
  • Either you’re an American or you are a Communist. You aren’t from America, so you must be a Communist.
  • Either you believe in evolution, or you are totally irrational. You say you don’t believe in evolution, so you must be irrational.

Statistical Fallacies

1. Hasty Generalization: Where someone generalizes about a class or group based upon a small and poor sample.
  • All plumbers are brilliant. I know a plumber who can calculate Pi to the 289,954th digit.
  • “Southerners talk fast. I was just on the phone with one and he sure talked fast.”
2. Weak Analogy: Where someone claims that some items which have only a few minor similarities are practically the same in almost everything else.
  • Clyde: “I think it is all right for governments in developing countries to execute citizens who don’t agree with the government. If you want to make an omelet, then you have to break a few eggs.”
  • A cloud is 75% water. A watermelon is 75% water. Since a plane can fly through a cloud, therefore a plane can fly through a watermelon.
3. Post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc: Where someone assumes that since A happened before B, A must have caused B.
  • Our rooster crows every morning. Then the sun comes up. Now do you understand how important roosters are?
  • Christianity came along in the first century, and a few hundred years after that, the Roman Empire fell. Christianity must have made it fall.
4. Proof-by-lack-of-evidence: Where someone claims something is true simply because nobody has yet given them any evidence to the contrary.
  • “There must be mountain lions living in Illinois, because I haven’t seen any proof that none exist.”
  • No evidence has been found that life does not exist on other planets. Therefore, we are not alone in the universe.


1. Appeal to Fear: Where someone moves you to fear the consequences of not doing what he wants.
  • Prosecuting Attorney: “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I urge you to convict John Jones of this crime of murder. We need to put him where he can never commit any crimes. If you don’t convict him, you may be his next victim.”
  • Restaurant owner: “You no lika’ da’ pizzas? I send over my cousin Tony for a little change a’ mind. He maka’ you lika’ da’ pizzas.”
  • Do you know what kind of damage a loose cow can do on your farm. Imagine what would happen if your electric fence failed and your cows wandered into the neighbors field. Buy a “Zapper” electric fence and you won’t have to worry about it.
2. Appeal to Pity: Where someone urges us to do something only because we pity him, or we pity something associated with him.
  • Radio advertisement: “Mr Jones lost the last election because his opponent used a smear campaign to discredit him. Mr Jones lost the election before that because of voter fraud. Don’t you think it is about time you voted for Mr Jones?”
  • Motorist: “But officer, this is the fifth ticket I’ve been given this year. If I get another ticket, then they will take my license away, and I won’t be able to drive to work. My wife and children will starve.”
3. Bandwagon: Where someone pressures us to do something just because many other people like us are doing it.
  • Clyde: “Dad, can I go to see the movie “Attack of the Killer Wombats?” Dad: “No, son, you can’t go. I heard that movie has bad things in it.” Clyde: “Awe, come on, everybody’s going to see it.”
  • “More Americans get their news from ABC than from any other source.”
4. Exigency: Where someone offers nothing more than a time limit as a reason for us to do what he wants.
  • Genuine lead teacups! Now 95% off! Hurry, while supplies last!
  • Mr: “Come on, why don’t you marry me today?” Miss: “Oh, I can’t make up my mind. I only met you this morning. Don’t you think it is a little early.” Mr: “I’m leaving tonight and won’t be back for several years. If you don’t marry me now, we may never have another chance.”
5. Repetition: Where a message is repeated loudly and very often in the hope that it will eventually be believed.
  • “Eat Sugarloops for breakfast! Eat Sugarloops for lunch! Eat Sugarloops for supper! Eat Sugarloops all the time! You will love Sugarloops.
6. Transfer: Where an advertiser gets us to associate our good or bad feelings about one thing, to another unrelated thing.
  • In a commercial, a handsome man with big bulging muscles is seen working out on the new “Gutwrencher” exercise machine. The announcer says, “Tone up your muscles in two weeks!”
  • In a commercial, Gara Gorgeous, the famous movie star with beautiful hair, holds up a bottle of shampoo and says. “Use Shimmer Bounce shampoo for better looking and better smelling hair.”
  • “Purefresh Mountain Spring Water”
7. Snob Appeal: Where someone encourages us to think his product would make us better, or stand out, from everybody else.
  • Advertisement: “Why read those boring logic books like everybody else does? You know you’re better than that. You need more intellectual stimulation. Read The Fallacy Detective. Be more logical than the rest.”
  • Buy skunk brand perfume. You will stand out in the crowd.
8. Appeal to Tradition: Where we are encouraged to buy a product or do something because it is associated with something old.
  • A black and white photograph of man building a guitar. The caption reads: “Play Martin Guitars. Our expert guitar craftsmen build guitars using only the most time honored traditions.”
  • A black and white photograph of an old 1920’s coupe on one page, and on the next a picture of a smart modern looking coupe whizzing down the road. Caption reads: “Ford Thunderbird: yesterday, today and tomorrow.”
9. Appeal to Hi-tech: Where someone urges us to buy something because it is the “latest thing” – but not necessarily because it is the best thing.
  • Clyde: “Hey Bert, you need to buy one of these new Niko shoes. They have hi-tech “Dinotraction.” It’s a new special feature that helps you cling onto the back of a running plesiosaur without falling off.”
  • Our “Laundry Ball” cleans your clothes automatically with our patented method of defusing the ionization of the fetezoic acids and implanting a catalyst.
Copyright April 01, 2002, all rights reserved. 

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Di balik pertarungan Prabowo vs Jokowi: Konsultan Politik Asing vs Dalam Negeri [Rob Allyn (Prabowo) vs Denny JA (Jokowi)]
Oleh Dewi Arum (Peneliti opini publik)

Di balik pertarungan Prabowo vs Jokowi: Konsultan Politik Asing vs Dalam Negeri [Rob Allyn (Prabowo) vs Denny JA (Jokowi)]
Di balik pertarungan Prabowo vs Jokowi: Konsultan Politik Asing vs Dalam Negeri Rob Allyn (Prabowo) vs Denny JA (Jokowi)

Setelah mayoritas lembaga quick count dan exit poll memenangkan Jokowi-JK sebagai presiden dan wakil presiden kita berikutnya, saatnya kita menganalisi lebih dalam soal strategi di balik pertarungan dua kandidat ini.
Pemilu presiden tak hanya menjadi pertarungan dua calon presiden dan dua mesin politiknya. Namun ia juga menjadi pertarungan dua stategi yang biasanya disusun oleh konsultan politik dan ahli survei opini publik dan prilaku pemilih. Pertarungan Prabowo versus Jokowi menjadi semakin bewarna karena juga melibatkan pertarungan dua konsultan politik, yang satu asal amerika (Rob Allyn di kubu Prabowo) dan konsultan domestik yang dikenal sebagai tokoh pertama yang membawa tradisi konsultan politik di Indonesia (Denny JA di kubu Jokowi).
Pertarungan menentukan kalah dan menang antara Prabowo dan Jokowi sebenarnya terjadi di 20 hari terakhir. Berdasarkan survei LSI di awal Juni 2014, selisih kemenangan Jokowi hanya 6.3 persen. Namun di akhir Juni 2014, merosot lagi kemenangan Jokowi hanya 0.5 persen saja, di bawah margin of error. Dalam kondisi seperti ini, kalah dan menang menjadi tergantung dari kecerdasan dan penetrasi kepada pemilih hingga hari-hari akhir menjelang penjoblosan 9 April 2014.
Salah satu penyebab merosotnya dukungan kepada Jokowi adalah kampanye hitam, penyebaran kebohongan soal identitas Jokowi.  Ia digambarkan sebagai warga non-pri, dari agama minoritas, bahkan belakangan disebut punya latar belakang PKI. Info bohong soal Jokowi itu beredar hingga pelosok desa. Bahkan anak-anak kecil di gang- gang kumuh bermain, sambil berlari dan berteriak: “Jokowi belum sunat, Jokowi belum sunat.”
Sungguhpun berita ini bohong, tapi cukup mempengaruhi pemilih yang datang dari segmen muslim konservatif, pendidikan menengah ke bawah dan ekonomi menengah ke bawah. Berdasarkan survei LSI sejak Januari 2014- Juni 2014, dukungan kepada Jokowi di segmen pemilih itu merosot dari di atas 50 persen menjadi di bawah 40 persen. Padahal jumlah wong cilik ini sekitar 60-70 persen populasi. Tak heran, terjadi pergeseran dukungan dari Jokowi ke Prabowo.
Kampanye hitam terhadap Jokowi terkesan sistematik dan dikerjakan oleh tokoh yang mengerti prilaku pemilih. Luas beredar kabar, Prabowo mempekerjakan konsultan politik asal amerika yang memang dikenal ahli dengan kampanye negatif dan kampanye hitam: Rob Allyn. Di 5 juli 2014, Ketua Umum Partai Gerakan Indonesia Raya Suhardi membenarkan Rob Allyn sebagai salah satu konsultan politik Prabowo-Hatta.
Untuk menghadapi merosotnya dukungan atas Jokowi, dan semakin mengecilnya selisih kemenangan, Timnas Jokowi pada tanggal 20 Juni 2014 secara resmi menggunakan jasa konsultan politik Denny JA. Timnas Jokowi diwakili oleh Andi Widjojanto mengontak Denny JA untuk memulai kerjasama.
Dalam dua kali pemilu presiden, Denny JA memang dikenal kontroversial namun berhasil ikut memenangkan SBY di tahun 2004 dan 2009. Di tahun 2004, misalnya, 3 bulan sebelum pemilu presiden, ia selalu menampilkan survei yang menyatakan SBY akan menjadi presiden RI. Padahal saat itu partai SBY, Demokrat, masih baru dan kecil. Tapi akhirnya pemilu presiden membuktikan manuver Denny JA.
Yang lebih kontroversial lagi dalam pemilu presiden 2009. Sebulan sebelum pemilu presiden, Denny JA bahkan ikut berkampanye membuat Iklan bahwa SBY akan menang satu putaran saja. Isu satu putaran sempat menjadi isu paling hot di era itu. Isu menang satu putaran itu bahkan mewarnai debat calon presiden resmi di pemilu presiden 2009.  Sekali lagi, pemilu 2009 membuktikan kebenaran prediksi Denny JA. Ia pun dianugrahi oleh PWI sebagai “The Newsmaker of Election 2009.”
Denny JA sendiri mengaku sudah membantu Jokowi lebih awal. Namun bantuannya sebelum dikontak Andi Widjajanto adalah bantuan secara pribadi kepada Jokowi secara pribadi pula. Dalam catatan hariannya, ia berbicara melalui telfon dengan Jokowi di rumah Luhut Pandjaitan, Sabtu 26 April sekitar jam 20.30. Jokowi sudah memintanya secara pribadi untuk ikut menyiapkan strategi dan team di luar team kampanye resmi.
Besoknya, minggu 27 April 2014,  Denny JA berjumpa muka langsung dengan Jokowi di rumah Luhut Pandjaitan. Saat itu Denny sudah memberikan gambaran bahwa kekuatan Jokowi ada pada civil society dan relawan, bukan pada partai politik dan media. Ia akan menggerakkan kekuatan itu, di luar team nasional resmi nantinya.
Namun Denny JA mengakui, ia baru bekerja secara resmi dengan team konsultan LSI setelah dikontak resmi oleh team nasional melalui Andi Widjajanto. Saat itu dukungan pada Jokowi sudah terus merosot. Kekuatiran bahwa Jokowi bisa kalah, sudah mulai meluas di kalangan elit. Denny JA pun segera menyusun stragegi melawan kampanye hitam. Ia membuat program untuk pemilih wong cilik dan pemilih menengah ke atas. Di balik pertarungan Jokowi versus Prabowo, terjadi juga pertarungan strategi dua konsultan politik: Rob Allyn vs Denny JA.
Dengan pengalamannya memenangkan dua kali pemilu presiden, 28 gubernur dan 70 walikota/bupati seluruh Indonesia,  Denny JA merasa mampu menundukkan konsultan politik luar negri yang disewa Prabowo. Denny JA mempekerjakan jaringannya di 11 propinsi yang menjadi target. Total populasi dari 11 propinsi itu sudah di atas 70 persen dari seluruh populasi Indonesia. 

Jaringan itu sudah ia kelola sejak memenangkan pilkada di daerah itu. Ribuan relawan dilatih untuk door to door ke rumah wong cilik. Total rumah tangga wong cilik yang didatangi pasukan relawannya berbilang jutaan. Denny JA menargetkan mengambil kembali hati wong cilik yang pergi dari Prabowo setidak 5 persen dari total populasi pemilih.
Ujar Denny JA, tanpa diminta resmipun, ia punya passion membantu Jokowi. Bahkan jika perlu, ia rela mengeluarkan dana dari koceknya pribadi.  Ini masalah ideologi, ujarnya. Denny sendiri terjun langsung memberikan pidato pengarahan di 3 propinsi terbesar: Jabar, Jateng dan Jatim. Untuk program pengarahan ini, Denny JA bekerja sama dengan Timnas Relawan di bawah Eriko. Denny meminta Eriko menyiapkan 30 kelompok relawan terkuat di masing-masing propinsi itu. Kepanitian di dearah disiapkan PDIP cabang propinsi. Pidato Denny JA di 3 propinsi itu sengaja diupload di youtube untuk juga bisa didengar oleh team relawan di wilayah lain.
Denny JA juga meyakinkan Jokowi, dengan bantuan Luhut Pandjaitan, untuk mengadopsi program yang sangat penting bagi civil society dan bagi wong cilik.  Pertama adalah janji program 100 hari jika terpilih. Dalam era 100 hari itu, Jokowi akan menanda tangani 3 perpres mengenai ekonomi, politik/hukum dan budaya.  Itu 3 isu yang paling popular.  Janji itu segera diiklankan. Denny JA sendiri yang membawa konsep iklan itu ke kompas, koran pertama yang menyiarkan janji itu.  Program itu kemudian diiklankan meluas ke media lain, bahkan dibuatkan juga baliho, spanduk dan selebaran, juga gerakan social medianya yang disebarkan ke seluruh Indonesia.
Kedua, program 5 kontrak politik dengan rakyat kecil yang kongkret: mulai dari janji bantuan satu juta per bulan kepada keluarga miskin, gaji PNS, guru, polisi dan TNI yang dinaikkan, janji menciptakan 10 juta lapangan kerja baru, sampai bantuan desa 1.2-1,4 M per tahun yang lebih tinggi angkanya dengan angka yang dikeluarkan Prabowo. Kontrak itu juga diiklankan segera oleh Denny JA.  Lima kontrak politik itu belakangan disempurnakan Jokowi- JK dalam konf pers menjadi Sembilan Program Nyata. Namun lima program kontrak politik yang disusun Denny JA itu tetap ada dalam Sembilan program itu.
Kampanye hitam gaya konsultan politik Rob Allyin dilawan Denny JA dengan kampanye putih untuk menarik minat wong cilik dan kalangan menengah atas.  Ujar Denny JA, “saya bisa juga menggunakan kampanye hitam untuk melawan Prabowo. Namun saya tak bersedia melakukannya. Saya sejak lama memperjuangkan Indonesia Tanpa Diskriminasi. Saya bersumpah tak pernah mau menggunakan isu agama, etnis atau ras untuk memenangkan calon pemimpin. Saya tak bersedia menang dengan menumbuhkan kultur diskriminasi yang lebih buruk. Itu akan menjadi racun yang terus merusak masyarakat walau pemilu sudah berakhir. 
Ujar Denny JA, konsultan politik yang matang harus juga peduli dengan pertumbuhan demokrasi dan hak asasi bangsanya.
Hasil exit poll dan quick count membuktikan, di minggu terakhir dukungan Jokowi bangkit kembali. Konsultan politik asing yang kondang di negaranya sudah dikalahkan oleh konsultan domestik Denny JA. Yang lebih penting lagi, kampanye hitam dikalahkan oleh kampanye putih.

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

9 terrible habits you need to stop immediately
Tim Ferriss

Guy checking internet with laptop at late night with dark room, view from above.

Perhaps you’ve heard of a “not-to-do list.” CEOs and productivity experts recommend the idea highly as a huge productivity booster that will help you free up time and headspace for all the things that really matter.

Sounds great. But what should go on it? Best-selling author Tim Ferriss has some ideas. In a recent short podcast he offered nine suggestions of bad work habits that many entrepreneurs and others desperately need to eliminate (chances are you are doing at least a couple of these–I’m personally massively guilty of two and five), so there is almost certainly something here that can boost your output.

Don’t overwhelm yourself, Ferriss says. Just tackle one or two at a time, eliminating counterproductive habits step by step, and eventually you’ll reclaim impressive amounts of time and energy.

Do Not Answer Calls from Unrecognized Numbers

Ferriss gives a couple of rationales for this one. First, the interruption will throw your concentration, costing you far more in time and brain power than just the conversation itself, and second, if it’s important, you’ll find yourself in a poor negotiating position, scrambling to formulate your thoughts when the caller is already well prepared. Instead, use Google Voice to check your messages or a service like PhoneTag to have them sent to you as email.

Do Not Email First Thing in the Morning or Last Thing at Night

“The former scrambles your priorities and all your plans for the day and the latter just gives you insomnia,” says Ferriss, who insists “email can wait until 10am” or after you check off at least one substantive to-do list item.

Do Not Agree to Meetings or Calls With No Clear Agenda or End Time

“If the desired outcome is defined clearly… and there’s an agenda listing topics–questions to cover–no meeting or call should last more than 30 minutes,” claims Ferriss, so “request them in advance so you can ‘best prepare and make good use of our time together.’”

Do Not Let People Ramble

Sounds harsh, but it’s necessary, Ferriss believes. “Small talk takes up big time,” he says, so when people start to tell you about their weekends, cut them off politely with something like “I’m in the middle of something, but what’s up?”

But be aware, not everyone agrees with this one (and certainly not in every situation), and you may want to pay particularly close attention to norms around chit chat when traveling internationally.

Do Not Check Email Constantly

Batch it and check it only periodically at set times (Ferriss goes for twice a day). Your inbox is analogous to a cocaine pellet dispenser, says Ferriss. Don’t be an addict. Tools like strategic use of the auto responder and Boomerang can help.

Do Not Over-Communicate With Low Profit, High Maintenance Customers

“Do an 80-20 analysis of your customer base in two ways,” Ferriss advises. “Which 20% are producing 80% or more of my profit, and which 20% are consuming 80% or more of my time? Then put the loudest and least productive on auto-pilot, citing a change of company policy.”

What should those “new policies” look like? Ferriss suggests emailing problem clients with things like guidance on the number of permissible calls and expected response times. If that sounds like it might annoy your loudmouth customers, his response is, essentially, who cares? Point them to other providers if they don’t like the new rules. “Sometimes you really have to fire your customers.”

Do Not Work More to Fix Being Too Busy

The cure for being overwhelmed isn’t working more, it’s sitting down and prioritizing your tasks, Ferriss believes. So don’t make the mistake of working frantically if you’re swamped. Instead, sit down and decide what actually needs doing urgently. If that means apologizing for a slightly late return call or paying a small late fee, so be it, as long as you manage to get the important things done.

“If you don’t have time, the truth is you don’t have priorities, so think harder, don’t work harder,” he says.

Do Not Carry a Digital Leash 24/7

At least one day a week leave you smartphone somewhere where you can’t get easy access to it. If you’re gasping, you’re probably the type of person that most needs to do kick this particular habit.

Do Not Expect Work to Fill a Void That Non-Work Relationships and Activities Should

“Work is not all of life,” says Ferriss. This seems obvious, but the sad truth is that while nearly everyone would agree to this in principle, it’s easy to let things slide to a point where your actions and your stated values don’t match up. Defend the time you have scheduled for loved ones and cool activities with the same ferocity you apply to getting to an important meeting for your business.

Monday, July 7, 2014

Lima Rahasia Memulai Bisnis dari Miliarder Richard Branson

Richard Branson merupakan salah satu orang super kaya yang memulai kerajaan bisnisnya dari kecil. Ia memulai bisnisnya tahun 1970 dengan membuka toko rekaman bernama Virgin Record, setelah beberapa tahun sebelumnya drop out dari sekolah.
Kini, kekayaan pemilik Virgin Group ini mencapai 5,1 miliar dollar AS atau sekitar Rp 61,2 triliun (kurs 1 dollar AS = Rp 12.000), dan menjalankan lebih dari 400 perusahaan di seluruh dunia.
Delapan dari ratusan perusahaanya tersebut,  menyumbang lebih dari 1 miliar dollar AS dalam pendapatan tahunan miliarder asal Inggris ini.
Selama 40 tahun terakhir, Branson nmempelajari seluk-beluk bisnis melalui trial and error. Pria yang pernah menjadi pramugari AirAsia akibat kalah bertaruh dengan CEO AirAsia Tony Fernandes ini, menemukan cara untuk terus membangun kerajaan bisnisnya yang inovatif.
Dalam bukunya yang berjudul "Like a Virgin: Secrets They Won’t Teach You at Business School,” Branson membagi lima rahasianya untuk memulai bisnis. Berikut tips dari Branson.
1. Jika Anda tidak menikmatinya, jangan dilakukan
"Saat memulai Virgin di sebuah basement di barat London, saya tidak mempunya rencana atau strategi besar. Saya tidak bertujuan untuk membangun kerajaan binis. keinginan saya sederhana saja, ingin membuat orang menikmatinya, bersenang-senang mengerjakannya, dan pada akhirnya berdoa hal itu bisa menghasilkan uang untuk membayar tagihan," tulis Branson.
2. Inovatif 
Mulai dari saat dia memutuskan nama perusahaannya Virgin, sebuah nama yang agak berisiko di tahun tahun 1970-an, Branson selalu menantang dunia. Dia menulis, bahwa tahun 1984 dirinya mendirikan Virgin Atlantic, sebagai maskapai yang mempunyai layanan konsumen yang bagus. Menurut dia, hal ini merupakan terobosan baru di saat tahun 80-an. Saat ini ini, Branson sedang menyiapkan VIrgin Atlantic, sebagai perusahaan pertama yang menawarkan perjalanan untuk orang sipil ke luar angkasa.
3. Menghargai karyawan
"Bagi saya tidak ada yang lebih menyedihkan saat mendengar sesorang menyesali tempat mereka bekerja," tulis Branson. Pemilik bisnis yang sukses menyadari, bahwa karyawan adalah aset yang paling berharga, dan membuat mereka merasa dihargai.
4. Memimpin dengan mendengar
Manajer yang bagus menyadari bahwa mereka tidak mempunyai semua jawaban. Kerjasama tim dapat mendorong pertumbuhan perusahaan. " Tentu, anda perlu mengetahui kemauan anda sendiri, tapi tidak ada gunanya memaksakan pendapat anda pada orang lain, tanpa perdebatan dan konsesus bersama," sebut Branson.
5. Terlihatlah
Para pendiri perusahaan tidak menutup diri dari karyawannya, baik mereka yang baru memulai perusahaan, ataupun para konglomerat yang telah menghasilkan miliaran dollar A. Mereka selalu menjalin komunikasi terbuka dengan para manajer, maupun karyawan level bawah. (as/businessinsider/

Sunday, June 22, 2014

Communications Lessons in the Prabowo Campaign

Regional Manager - Southeast Asia at blueVisions

Right now the biggest opponent of Prabowo isn't Jokowi but himself.
His strong nationalistic rhetoric isn't resonating with the younger voters as they know that it isn't the foreign investors that's screwing the country but the elected and appointed officials.
"Corruptors will have no place in Indonesia," Prabowo yelled, while flanked by Suryadharma and Bakrie.
Isn't Suryadharma being pursued by the highly trusted KPK for his alleged role in the graft case of the haj funds?
And then there's Bakrie.
Prabowo recently attacked Jokowi saying: "We need to elect a leader who is not a puppet. A leader who cannot be bribed or influenced by foreign entities..."
Totally misplaced comms strat.
Jokowi was successful as a mayor with no taint of foreign influence. As a popular governor, the only allegation of graft is from the procurement of defective buses that's weak at best since it targets only the governor yet does not include the mayor, budget control management, planning and control team, which stands to reason why KPK isn't pursuing anything.
Where's the influence of foreign entity/entities?
If Prabowo continues to open this can of worms, what will be revealed are the accomplishments of Jokowi as a public servant while Prabowo shows how he's never held an elected position.
While Prabowo engages in high level speeches, Jokowi is out jogging with the masses.
How could Prabowo's team blow up their momentum so much?

Strategic Communication Tips

1. Avoid Mudslinging - If you don't have factual evidence, fact-checks, complete and sustainable plan, do not engage in mudslinging. A taint of veiled rumor can come from some quarters to instill doubt but it should never come from you unless you have credible data. The public will soon tire of baseless accusations and the cross-hair will be brought back to you.
2. Stick To The Message - All politicians are elected based on one premise: how to sell Hope. Your Action Plan may be well and good but if you can't simplify the message, reiterate the message, and reinforce it at all times, people will be confused where you stand. Look at tobacco industry, they've never veered away from their message that it's cool to smoke despite all the pronouncements that they will kill you. This is the reason why no government on earth has managed to beat them in delivering their message. And they hire professional advertisers, too, while governments continue to use their student council employees.
3. Optics - Like it or not, as a politician, you will be judged by a larger number of people based on your visual message rather than your rhetoric. Hitler, Mussolini, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton -- regardless whether or not you like them -- were able to sell to their countrymen their message that emanated from their perceived power. Hitler mesmerized his entire country to send their children to engage in horrific acts. Mussolini turned a small country into a fascist state. Bush sold to the world Weapons of Mass "Distraction", evil axis, and other jazzed up words. Clinton, well, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Let's admit it, how people see you is a message that you will continually either reinforce or change. How are you doing that?
Always do an internal check on the visual and verbal messages you are projecting or saying. Once you've identified it, stick with it and sell it. You can repackage it, rehash it, enhance it, but never veer away from it.
That's how you shape people's minds. That's how you win an election.