BUS602: Marketing Management

What would be measurable or documentable attributes that would help us distinguish among sources? What would establish sources' credibility as opinion leaders for their communities of interest? 

• High numbers of citations by members of the community: for science documents, literally the extent to which they are cited; for popular media, their distribution; for "fringe" literature, the "buzz," measurable also by popularity within their target audience and, in the case of blogs, their ranking by links and hits. Is the source therefore credible as an opinion leader for that community? 
• Market niche: to whom is the source targeted? The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine are targeted to professionals in medical research; New Scientist is targeted to scientific professionals and decision-makers, as well as interested laypeople; Discovery is targeted entirely to interested laypeople and students. Is that documentable, e.g., by reference to mission statements or self-descriptions? 
• Distribution: does distribution data, or access data (in the case of web sources/info-feeds), demonstrate widespread use by members of the source's target audience/community of interest? This would to some extent duplicate, and therefore corroborate, the citations variable, above. 
• Media: the medium of information distribution itself might help distinguish among expert, fringe, and punditry, in terms of print journal, professional association newsletter, tabloid, etc. 

Researchers weigh these variables for each trend which in turn increases, or decreases, the prioritization of one issue versus another. These ranking systems in turn provide a useful sight check of whether the thinking has been sufficiently robust.

Determine what should be uploaded as follows: 

• Does the link aim to identify and assess possible future threats and opportunities, including radical alternatives? 
• Does the link explore socio-economic trends and their potential impacts? 
• Does the link challenge existing political, economic, social, technological, and environmental assumptions and evidence? 
• Does the link question assumptions underlying current policies? 
• Does the link pioneer or employ methodologies appropriate to best practice horizon scanning, strategic planning, or change management? 

Good links have the following attributes: 

• Credible and eclectic sources from the full range of disciplines. 
• Easy to read/plain language. 
• Thought provoking. 
• Future focused (except where history or today give context and understanding of the future). 
• Helpful when creating future plans and actions. 

And question links as follows: 

• Is at deep-link site level wherever available. 
• Is comprehensively described through the content classification. 
• Correctly describes an interesting title and properly ascribed source. 
• Contains a description that eliminates a site's over-claims to fame. 
• Includes key tags: document type, timeframe, country of origin, URL, language. 
• Only reference prepayment sites at front page level and are clearly marked as "subscription" sites.