A recent Christian Science Monitor article got me thinking about change. In it, Mark Pfeifle, a deputy national security adviser for George Bush, suggests that Twitter and its founders be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize. It is an interesting idea and I can’t disagree with his argument but that isn’t what got me thinking.

What really caught me was his describing Twitter as a change agent. Here is the quote, “Twitter has been criticized as a time-waster – a way for people to inform their friends about the minutiae of their lives, 140 characters at a time. But in the past month, 140 characters were enough to shine a light on Iranian oppression and elevate Twitter to the level of change agent. Even the government of Iran has been forced to utilize the very tool they attempted to squelch to try to hold on to power.”

I am intrigued by this because to some degree Twitter didn’t make a difference at all. The elections in Iran were won by the incumbent and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has demanded Iranians accept Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as President. We don’t really know, and many seriously doubt, if the election results are legitimate. Not to mention the ruling party still rules. It would be impossible to deny however that Twitter did not as Pfeifle say become, “…a window for the world to view hope, heroism, and horror.” Twitter may not have ensured a fair election but it did provide a tool which empowered people who had not before felt empowered to stand up for democracy. They did so hoping the world was watching and hoping the outcome would be different.

This is a good lesson for agents of change everywhere. Change is hard and oft times the results are not exactly as hoped. For instance many marketers change campaigns and tactics with the hope of seeing more prospects converted or growth of existing customers. In many cases the silver bullet of change does not instantly drive financial results. Instead what they find is engagement levels are increased but the corresponding sales metrics are not. Does this mean the change exercise was a failure? I would say no. Instead it needs to be viewed in context of longer term objectives. How can increased engagement be used to drive the desired results? What can be learned from the change effort which can improve campaigns or tactics in future?

While the stakes are considerably higher for Twitterers in Iran than the average marketer, it is worth remembering – success for change can be measured many ways.