« Main

Aug 7, 2008

Simplicity

Over the past few years, my writing has gotten tighter, more direct. Shorter sentences, less jargon, fewer uses of "leading" this or "state of the art" that. Is it a result of age and experience, my increasing involvement in bullshit-intolerant social media marketing or some combination of both? Who knows?

What I do know is that I try to make every word count. Even though I sometimes write long, I don't use too many extra adjectives or empty adverbs. Sure every now and then, one sneaks in, but for the most part, my writing is a lot crisper than it was five years ago.

In fact, one of my biggest criticisms of  PR pitches is that they are wordsmithed to death in search of the perfect phrase, the most clever pun, the perfect call to action. They end up excessively wordy and take far too long to get the point. Sometimes they miss it altogether.

I was reminded of this fundamental change in my own writing this week while working on some content for a new client. A professional association, it accomplishes much of its work through volunteer committees. I had drafted a simple document for the group's launch and a few committee members had feedback. Which I welcomed and sincerely tried to incorporate in the doc. After all, it is their group and their intent was to clarify the value proposition.

But as I was doing it, I realized that many suggested changes weren't making the document any clearer or more persuasive. They were just more words to say the same thing we'd already said in fewer.

It reminded me of the anime cartoons my son watches that revolve around card game battles and duels. Shows like Yu-Gi-Oh, Bakugan Battle Brawlers and Chaotic. In every show, the combatants have to painstakingly explain what they are doing. Otherwise we would have absolutely no clue. It goes sort of like this:

 I use the super monster card which has 200 more life points than your life sucking monster card to free my super duper card, says the hero. Ah ha, replies the villain, but now I play my something or other card that reduces your life points by a factor of ten and allows me to use my life sucking monster card in magna mode. [Huge sigh from the hero's friends] Oh no, says the hero, I didn't see that coming. But I can play my magna-minimizer card to remove your life sucking monster from the field.

And so on. and on. and on.

All this explanation just sucks the excitement right out of the story. Give me a simple sword battle or a good shoot 'em up any day. Where I don't need a scorecard, a narrator or a translator to understand the action.

Clarity. That's what makes a good story. As opposed to a cartoon designed to sell packs of playing cards and other merchandise to kids who will probably never actually play the game. Because it is too complicated.

It's the same for your marketing message. Strip away the adjectives and explanatory clauses. What's left? If you can't tell the story without all the extra explanation in those clauses? If your story seems blah without lots of adjectives? Then you probably don't have a good story and a few more adjectives won't make it so. They are just more empty words, taking up space and contributing nothing.

It's never been more true.

Keep It Simple.

---

If you've been waiting to hear all about the California trip, I posted the high, and low, lights over at Snapshot Chronicles.

Posted @ 12:08PM in Marketing | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Jul 12, 2008

Marketing moves I wish I'd made

Before I leave for BlogHer on Wednesday, I'll get back to blogger relations and share my thoughts on the recipe for a perfect pitch. In the meantime, though, I wanted to tell you about two marketing efforts that really impressed me this week.

First, Saab's sponsorship of USA Network show Burn Notice. The second season premiered Thursday night and featured just about the sweetest product placement I have ever seen in a network television show. A good friend is in charge of product placement and sponsorships for a computer manufacturer, so I notice these more now than I used to, but this one was particularly good.

Products are mentioned by name in entertainment products -- TV, radio, movies, Internet -- either because the producers and writers feel strongly that the brand is important to the story regardless of promotional consideration or because the company has negotiated a sponsorship and product placement with the entertainment vehicle.When it is a sponsorship situation, the brand name mention can often feel stilted and artificial. This wasn't.

Burn Notice has done a pretty good job overall integrating its vehicle sponsors into the storyline, but the mention of Saab was as sweet as a marketer could wish for. A full sentence describing the Saab convertible that was totally in context and character. Truly, you cannot do better than that.

Next, Stride Gum's sponsorship of "Where the Hell is Matt?" You just have to watch, but the short story is Matt Harding danced his way around the world, and Stride Gum paid the way. Why is this so cool? Because the videos just make you feel good, and we could all use a bit more of that. And that's why these videos have gone so very very viral. Well done to Stride for finding Matt and offering to subsidize not just one but two of these remarkable world journeys.


Where the Hell is Matt? (2008) from Matthew Harding on Vimeo.

It's a model to which consumer companies should pay serious attention. Stride found someone doing something interesting online, decided to sponsor it, but made no demands on the creator. They got it -- association with something so infectious would be beneficial to their brand.

I'll look for the brand next time I pick up a packof gum.

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 9:07PM in Marketing, Viral Marketing | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Feb 25, 2008

Bloggers & Customer Service: Do blog complaints make a difference?

"Conventional" social media wisdom would have it that companies need to pay attention to the blogosphere, or risk their brands. For proof, out trots the example of Jeff Jarvis and Dell Hell. Jarvis' complaints about Dell customer service percolated up to mainstream media and are oft-cited as the impetus behind Dell's *big* move into social media about a year ago.

Now, you may sense a certain cynical undertone in the above paragraph, and you would be right. While I absolutely believe that companies should be listening to what bloggers -- their customers -- say, I am regularly provided with proof that either companies aren't listening or they are, and have no bloody idea what to say, or how to say it, when faced with blogosphere complaints, or compliments, about products and services.

My most recent proof:

Ike Pigott has been tracking the response, or lack thereof, to a post on his blog complimenting Blockbuster on its customer service. He also divined that Canon saw, but did not respond to positive comments about its products.

While I haven't made quite such a science of it, I have written about customer service on this blog on more than one occasion. Most recently about AAA's piss-poor performance with my flat tire before Christmas. Any word from AAA? Nope. And I've also mentioned my general, and unexepected,  pleasure with Verizon's support of its cellular customers. On every occasion that I've had to call, I've been treated well. Most recently by a lovely young lady named Amy who offered a credit on something that had gone wrong before I asked. Any response from Verizon? Nope.

Not to mention my friend Mary Schmidt, whose interactions with American Airlines prove without a shadow of a doubt that the airline just doesn't get it.

This is by far a scientific survey, which is why I am so pleased that the Society for New Communications Research is working with corporate partner Nuance to understand the extent to which bloggers think their opinions are, or are not, impacting companies. Please take the survey and let us know whether you think Corporate America is listening. SNCR is offering a special discounted registration to New Comm Forum in April for those that complete the survey. Direct link to survey here.

And that, my friends, is well worth it. There's a great roster of speakers and opportunities to network with other communicators at New Comm Forum. I'm moderating the luncheon keynote on the first day, a panel of conference alumni coming back to tell how they applied what they learned at the conference at their organizations. More on that next week.

---

Client News: Maxwell Street Documentary is doing a T-shirt giveaway at the blog Notes of the Urban Blues. It is a very cool shirt. Just tell us about your favorite Blues artist and you can be entered to win.

And please check out the new podcast Business Forward, strategic advice for small and medium businesses, that I am producing for client GuideMark.

Tags: , , , , , , 

Posted @ 6:02PM in Blogger relations, Blogging, Customers, Marketing, PR, Social media | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Dec 29, 2007

Customer Service: the final volley (for 2007 at least)

(warning, long post)

Earlier this month, I wrote two customer service posts. In the first post, "if customer service is the new marketing,"  I wondered, if this is indeed the case -- if  front line interactions with customers are as or more important than any marketing campaigns we might devise, why is so much customer service still so awful. The second post featured comments from two bloggers who recently wrote about their own less than stellar customer experiences, Mir Kamin and TDavid.

Originally, I was going to wrap up the series with an "objective" analysis of the customer service problem, to see if we might be able to understand the macro factors causing it to be so bad as well as the unique micro factors in customer service excellence that perhaps we could model in our own attempts to improve.

Well, all that got thrown out the window last Saturday. Instead,  I am going to share an "epiphany" I had on the whole topic after a most disastrous customer experience.

First the story. Saturday morning, December 21, my son and I were driving from our home in Mass. to our vacation home in Vermont. My husband had a few things to do at home so he was following later. We had a carful of stuff, including three of the family dogs. Just after we got on Route 89 -- the one the runs the whole "width" of NH to Vermont, we got a flat and pulled off the highway. Not the breakdown lane, I got off the highway all together hoping to find a gas station. This was around noontime. I called my husband, who was still at home and then called AAA once I determined from my GPS that the nearest service station was more than three miles away.

And the comedy of errors began.

Call Number 1: Service Rep says that Southern NE AAA cannot help me so transfers me to Northern NE AAA. Except he doesn't. He disconnects me.

Call Number 2 (immediately after): I connect with another rep, who really does try to help. I explain the problem and where I am -- on the Hopkinton/Route 103 exit off 89 West in NH. Remember this part, it is important. She gives me a case number and promises to rush a crew out. I assume (yeah I know) that she knew how to do something that the first rep did not.

10-15 minutes after we hang up, inbound call: AAA trying to understand where we are. So I tell them, again. We hang up.

Then  it dawns on me. They think we are in Hopkinton  Massachusetts.   Even though I was pretty clear.

So I call back. This is my Call Number 3 to AAA. It's probably around 12:45, 1 pm by this time. New service rep. Finds the file. Confirms my suspicion that they are sending the crew to the wrong place. Connects me to AAA Northern NE, who cannot figure out where I am. Umm. Aren't they supposed to know the roads? Anyway, a very long call later, we *think* someone is on the way.

Around quarter to two, though, I get a little nervous so I call back. Call Number 4 if you are still counting. Unfortunately, I still have to call Southern NE AAA because that's the number on my card, and I neglected to ask for the Northern NE number when I was on the phone with them. Rep manages to transfer me, and I get the information that a wrecker is on the way from Manchester. For those of you who don't know the area, that's not far from where I broke down. Maybe 20 minutes. She also gives me the direct number to call, which comes in handy a little while later.

So we wait. And finally around 2:15... my husband and a local cop show up at the same time. Yes, you read that right. My husband made it from Hudson Mass. BEFORE AAA from Manchester NH. The police officer calls AAA to see what the scoop is, and while he is on his phone with them, AAA calls my phone. The wrecker is lost. This is probably about 2:30 or so.

WIth directions from the officer, the wrecker finally finds us, and the mechanic quickly fixes the flat. We're on our way shortly after 3pm, with another 90 minutes to drive to reach the house. It was a brutal day, but that's not why I share the story.

Here's the epiphany. The people weren't the customer service problem. Or at least not the worst of it. The process was the problem.

Each person was  trying to help, but the system is set up so poorly that they just couldn't provide a good customer experience. For whatever reason, Southern NE AAA can't enter a problem in NH and have Northern NE AAA then pick up the call. And of course the whole mess was compounded by the fact that either the rep or the system made the initial faulty assumption that our Hopkinton was in Mass. I was also thrown by the fact that the reps -- even the Northern NE AAA reps -- we spoke to couldn't figure out where we were. Don't they publish maps??

The people sincerely wanted to help. But they couldn't because the system got in the way. As a result, AAA failed miserably to efficiently deliver the roadside assistance service that is the reason I (and most people) joined AAA in the first place.  And my son and I were stuck by the side of the road for three hours on a cold but clear December day.

So when we experience truly excellent customer service, either the system is set up to allow such great service -- think Nordstrom or Zappos. Or an individual rises above the inadequacies of the process.

Shouldn't we be aiming for the former? Systems and processes that allow customer facing employees --whether service, sales or marketing -- to deliver the positive experiences we all want.  I don't tend to do big end-of-the-year posts, but if I were to wish for one thing for us as customers and marketers, it would be that: systems and processes that let us satisfy, not frustrate, the customer.

As for AAA, I do intend to contact the organization and share my concerns. I still think it is a great organization that delivers a valuable service.

I just wish it had done so a little better last Saturday.

A final postscript:  The local police officer only found us because a fellow cop coming off duty called it in.  It never occured to me (or apparently any of the many other cars that passed us) to call the police. He told me that you should always call the local police in an emergency, even something as simple as a flat tire. They often can get AAA or a wrecker out faster, and certainly we felt safer on the side of the road once we had the cruiser there.

Tags: ,

Posted @ 11:12AM in Customers, Marketing | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Dec 9, 2007

Customer Service (Part Two)

(warning, long post)

As I wrote in my previous post, it seems we have a serious disconnect when it comes to customer service. At the same time we champion the "conversation" with the customer, the general level of customer service is decreasing. Sure, there are exceptions, but stories like Mir's recent internet service "dis-service" and Mary's lovely experience on American Airlines seem to be the norm.

I've been wondering, why? Do products just "suck more?"  Are the occasional wonderful customer service stories really that WONDERFUL or is it that they just exceed our now much lower expectations?

What is customer service excellence?

First, let's hear from two of the bloggers I used in my examples: Mir Kamin and TDavid.They both replied to my questions in email so I'll let them speak for themselves. In part three, I'll share some of my thoughts on the subject.

Mir:

"I think the norm of shoddy customer service,and yes, in a lot of ways I do think it's become the norm) is yet another symptom of our "fast food society." Look, I've said it over at Cornered Office (and somewhat more obliquely, at Woulda Coulda Shoulda), but I'll spell it out right here: I was on a plan that only cost $6.95/month. I'm not saying I necessarily DESERVED to get screwed, but honestly, what did I expect for that amount of money? We want it faster and cheaper and as a consumer body, THAT is what we demand, rather than quality and courtesy, sadly.

That said, lesson learned over here, bigtime. I can make all the excuses I want -- they promised me service, I bought that plan when I was first starting out and was worried I couldn't afford more, whatever. I'm paying a lot more for my new service, and at least this has taught me that it's worth every penny.

The businesses that triumph in America right now are the ones that can do it the cheapest and the most conveniently. That's why the Walmarts continue to thrive while the heart-and-soul community mom-and-pop stores struggle. You can't be cheap, convenient AND personal. It just doesn't add up. And most of us simply cannot afford to go top-shelf for most things.

Until we as a consumer body start making a lot of noise and putting our dollars where our mouths are, it's not going to change.

Think about the best customer service you've heard lately. I'll bet it was the Zappos story of the woman who not only ended up having them basically white-glove a return for her, but sent her flowers in condolence because when she was talking to the rep she mentioned that her mother had died. Zappos is committed to customer service and they do it better than almost anybody out there, right now. They are also INCREDIBLY expensive. They have to be.

Now. All of that said, I think a VAST IMPROVEMENT in customer service is possible without spending billions of dollars, and that's to encourage CSRs to act like they care. In my situation, a lot of my ire could've been circumvented had the CSRs involved simply apologized and/or seemed less apathetic. That doesn't take that much time and it would've made a world of difference. Maybe in today's "GIMME" society "the customer is always right" is an impractical goal, but when did we just plain stop being NICE to the customer?"

TDavid:

Do products just "suck more?"

"Either it's very coincidental or there is a direct correlation between more ad-supported software and services and negative customer experiences.

Somewhere along the line beta and release software and, as in the Xbox 360 case, hardware have merged. This has noticeably lowered the overall quality of products and services on a wider scale. In some cases these days customers are being expected to become unwilling beta testers and sometimes even paying for the privilege like the Xbox 360.

It's one thing to not be charged in a beta test, it's another to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars and be told the only solution is out of warranty repair or buying more of the same faulty hardware.

Microsoft in their much publicized Red Rings of Death warranty extension didn't cover another common problem: game/DVD disc read errors. So if you have a machine that's older than one year and doesn't read discs any more, they'll expect you to pay to get that fixed or you'll need a third party warranty.

On the software side, the amount of time new/upgrade versions are being turned around seems to be shortening so that just when you start to get to an acceptable level of usefulness and value, you're being asked to pay for a new version and rinse, repeat."

Are the good stories really wonderful or do they just exceed our now much lower expectations?

"Expectation levels are lower now, but there are still some positive stories out there. Harder to find, but they're out there.

These days if a company ships something that runs on the computer without causing installation migraines or turning our computing experience into slow-mo that's cause for joy, where that should be expected. Demanded.

We're putting up with more negative customer experiences in web 2.0 than we should. Sites, services and mashups being engineered poorly that if they become popular won't meet demand without major restructuring. Some services have come to the rescue like Amazon S3 to address these needs and that's a good thing, but I see a lot of web 2.0 headstones over the next couple years that couldn't make a viable business plan out of being ad-supported. VCs are already pulling life support systems, flatline imminent.

But it's not just Web 2.0.

Marvel came out with a paid product: their comics online for $9.99/month and they couldn't even scale up to demand. Spider-man is on the phone looking for help.

How funny is that? If we paid to access comics -- and couldn't because the site was down -- would we receive some proportional refund of the time we couldn't access?"

What is customer service excellence?

"For web services: fast response time, good, reliable uptime (at least 99.5%). Essential for paid services.

For all services/products: Minimum amount of time and hassle solving issues and problems. Being treated like an important asset of the business rather than a nuisance. In the case of faulty workmanship on a product, fixing it with as minimal hassle as possible. Companies that recognize and reward loyalty through better deals on future business being conducted, sharing income from referral sales and creative promotions are providing a valuable service.

And good customer service includes having an easy to find telephone number on the company website with an operator on the other side -- preferably without having to navigate through a machine -- that speaks clearly and doesn't resort to some canned script to answer questions.

Bad customer service is forcing customers to email their responses, fill out a form or navigate through some confusing knowledge base and wait who knows how long only to be sent a scripted response. Or being told you have to pay $$$ just to talk to a human being about the problem installing the software or hardware you just purchased."

Thanks, Mir and TDavid for giving us such meaty food for thought. Tomorrow, I'll share some of mine.

Update 12/10: Just a couple of links apropos of the customer service conversation. Geoff Livingston tells us about the Comcast must die blog and Lauren Vargas shares a piss-poor email response from a craft supplies company.

Tags:

Posted @ 7:12PM in Customers, Marketing | Comments (0) | TrackBack (2)

Dec 4, 2007

If customer service is the new marketing (Part One)

(warning, long post)

If customer service is the new marketing, why do so many companies have such crappy marketing?

In recent posts, Brian Solis and Kami Huyse both argued, with slightly different but generally similar perspectives, that customer service is the new marketing. In simple terms [and without any of the great nuances they shared, so read their posts :-)  ] what they are getting at is that the customer's experience with the company, with the product/brand, is what forms his decision to purchase, or not. And that experience is created by much more than exposure to a few marketing campaigns or the occasional customer service call. Blogs, online forums, word of mouth are all becoming part of this experience, and companies need to understand and respond appropriately.

Companies also have to understand that now more than ever, it is ALL about the customer. No matter how great the product, how wonderful the blog, without a customer, there is no business. Everyone in the company is in customer service. This was of course true before as well, but it is so much more obvious now. Simple things like an ill-placed blog comment or "astroturfing" positive anonymous comments on posts negative about a product create far more complications for a company than a rude customer service rep could in the "old days." We've got the proof, you see, in the email and RSS trail.

I agree with them on pretty much all counts. I have always believed in placing the customer at the center of our marketing activity. This is not an equivalent to saying "the customer is always right." She isn't. We aren't. But there are positive ways of handling negative situations, whether the company's fault or the ubiquitous "operator error." It is possible to say "no, you can't have it for free" or "not under warranty" or whatever it may be in a way that doesn't leave the customer feeling cheated.

Why is it then, that there seem to be so many instances of bad, awful, terrible, nasty customer service? Here are just some of the more recent stories I've heard or read.

Popular mom blogger Mir Kamin's websites went down in November. Her Internet provider WiredHub was unresponsive (and that's putting it mildly) even after multiple days of outage. Yes, you read that right: no information, no response. And when the response did come, it wasn't terribly comforting. Read her post for the details.

On her way back from Europe, marketing blogger Mary Schmidit got tagged with an overweight baggage charge from American Airlines. Even though the bag was an acceptable weight for international travel, because she switched carriers and had to recheck her bags,  the domestic carrier AA charged her the overweight tariff. She describes the tremendous sympathy of the airline employees here.

Shel Holtz learned that the motto of bank Washington Mutual didn't extend all the way to actual practice when he tried to send money to his son, a soldier about to deploy to Iraq. The bank had closed his son's account for being overdrawn $0.98, without any notification, and refused to reactivate it so Shel could deposit funds. He could open a new account, but that would mean a new ATM card, which would not reach his son before he left for Iraq. In other words, SOL. The good news: another financial insitution came through. [Kami Huyse also posted about this.]

Forrester analyst Jeremiah Owyang wrote about brands that didn't respect his time. So far the only one mentioned in his post that hasn't responded to him in some fashion is Delta Airlines. Jeneane Sessum wrote about Google inexplicably losing email messages.

These are just a few examples from the blogs I read from the month of November. Imagine what I might find if I really started to dig. No, in fact, don't imagine that. It is too depressing.

I also had my own little customer service contre-temps in early November with a small specialty goods catalog company. I didn't blog about it then, and am not naming the company here because it eventually was resolved satisfactorily, but it illustrates how the intermediation effect of email escalates situations.

The details:  I had ordered something more than a year ago. Manufacturer delay upon delay, they could not deliver the products. They had charged my credit card upon the order (not really good policy BTW), and when the product could not be delivered, instead of refunding the money, they issued a store credit with an expiration date.

Now, as we all know, this in itself is not legal, on two counts, but they are a small company, so I was willing to let it go and use the credit. Until  I placed an order on the website, and couldn't use the credit.

So I emailed them, and learned that I had to call with my credit card number in order for the credit to be applied. They could not get the information from the web order. This seemed odd although I am certain the answer to that lies somewhere in the shopping cart they use.  So I tried to call. And there was NEVER any answer.

I finally followed up with yet another email asking them to resolve the situation, and was met with amazing email hostility from one of the business owners. Rude and disrespectful doesn't even begin to cover it. It was apparently up to me to keep calling until I could reach someone, and I could not cancel the new order either. It was sounding more and more like they just didn't want to give the credit.[ Twitter friends may recall this because one Sunday morning, I asked for opinions on whether to blog about it. ]

In the end, I didn't over-react, sanity prevailed, and I got the credit. And the new merchandise I had ordered. But, just think about it -- the vendor felt perfectly justified being downright rude to a customer. How can that happen? Sure, it is easier to be rude in bits and bytes than face-to-face or even on the phone, and that certainly creates some of the negative customer service that happens these days. But not all. Mary Schmidt was at the airport. So was Jeremiah. Shel Holtz went to the bank. 

If we can't get this most basic thing right, how can we possibly expect to have a mutually beneficial "conversation" with our customer? Why is courtesy so uncommon in so many customer service situations?

I haven't even touched on the issue of shoddy products. They are even more central to our experience. And just as much of a problem as poor customer service. Here's just one example. Technology blogger TDavid has had five Xboxes in the past year. All but one returned under warranty. This can't be helping the bottom line, yet wouldn't we all say that a bottom line mentality is what causes the shoddy products in the first place?  

Now, of course, there are exceptions.  Who hasn't heard the wonderful story of Zappos sending flowers to the woman whose mother had just died?  That's exceptional customer service. In fact it is more than that. It is exceptional humanity.

But most positive customer service stories are much more mundane. Do we call them great because our expectations are so much lower, or is it truly great? For example, on two separate occasions, I had some problems with my Blackberry. Both times, Verizon call reps did a great job solving the problem, and following up with me to make sure the problem really was resolved. Do I call it great simply because cell phone providers usually get bad marks for customer support and my previous company  (rhymes with singular) did a horrible job? Or was it really great?

Part Two will try to answer some of  these questions, with some input from Mir and TDavid who were kind enough to share their thoughts with me.

Tags: ,

Posted @ 1:12PM in Customers, Marketing, Social media | Comments (11) | TrackBack (1)

Nov 21, 2007

Thanks-meme for Thanksgiving

Kami Huyse tagged me in her Thanksgiving meme: "Who had a big influence on you and how did that affect the direction of your life or career?"

Like some of my fellow "taggees," a few of the major influences on my career weren't terribly positive. Rather, it was my response to a negative or messy situation that moved me forward or helped me make an important decision.

Let's get these out of the way first, shall we. No names. If you are reading this and think it might be you, it probably is.

Thanks to the editor in my first job out of college who told me I couldn't write. Gave me the kick in the pants to evaluate what I really wanted to do. I got a new job and embarked on a career in marketing. And here I am writing. Nearly every day. Hmmm.

Thanks to the various managers in various corporate jobs who suffered from varying degrees of sexism and found it hard to promote me to the next level. No matter how good the performance or results. Especially the one who hired a super-duper idiot to take over a job I had been doing for years. Each and every time, I moved on to something better.

Now for the positive influences.

First and foremost my family, and most especially my mom Sandra Getgood. From her, I learned that there was nothing I couldn't do if I set my mind to it.

I had lots of wonderful teachers in high school, college and my MBA program, but three stand out: Jean St. Pierre (Andover), Jill Morawski (Wesleyan) and Cornelia Eschborn (Rivier).

Thanks to all the printers, advertising, marketing and PR folk who shared their expertise with me as I learned on the job, especially in the early years of my career.

Thanks to everyone who has ever worked for me for the privilege of working with you, learning from you and hopefully teaching you a few things as well.

Thanks to Gene Mehr, now a client, who years ago recognized that I had some talent and treated me like an equal when I was just a twenty-something who thought she knew more than she did. I still have the four-star "marketing general" helmet.

Thanks to Scott Murray, former CFO at The Learning Company, for re-assigning me to the Cyber Patrol unit in January 1999. And thanks to Greg Bestick, who worked with me to sell the Cyber Patrol business in 2000 for nearly 10x what TLC had paid for it in 1997. Managing the business unit and my involvement in the whole sales process, from road show to due diligence, was one of the highlights of my career. Maybe I'll do it again someday.

And finally, thanks to you, the readers of Marketing Roadmaps, for reading, for commenting, for making me part of your online conversation. You inspire me to be better.

Kami didn't specify how many others we were supposed to tag, so I'll just wing it. I'm tagging David Wescott, Christina/A Mommy Story, Kelly/Mocha Momma, Julie Marsh, Tom Murphy and Katie Paine.

Happy Thanksgiving!

UPDATE:

David Wescott writes about campaigning for Steven Tolman for state rep nearly 20 years ago and how that influenced the way he approaches his work.

Julie Marsh says she "learned the most from those who played the part of supporters when times were good, but were nowhere to be found when times were bad."

Katie Paine, back from Thanksgiving in Islamabad, writes about how she became a "genetically unemployable serial entrepreneur."

Kelly (Mocha Momma) tells us what led her down the path to becoming a high school dean.

Christina (A Mommy Story) tells about women who have been positive role models for her: her aunts, mother and grandmother.

Tags: ,

Posted @ 6:11PM in Community, Marketing, Memes, PR, Social networks | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Nov 19, 2007

The Discipline of Social Media Marketing

Over the past few weeks, a number of people have posted about where social marketing "fits" in the organizational structure of a company, what sort of outside service agency is best positioned to help companies with their social media marketing efforts and how do we define expertise in this new field. Among them, and apologies if I leave anyone off: Todd Defren, Dave Fleet, Susan Getgood (that's me), Josh Hallet, Kami Huyse, Geoff Livingston, and Jeremy Pepper.

Is PR the rightful functional "owner" of social media? Or should it be marketing or advertising that gets the ball? Perhaps social media marketing is just a subset of word-of-mouth marketing? With everybody and his brother now hanging out their shingles as blogging experts and social media gurus, how does a company determine who has the expertise and experience to help it navigate these waters? 

My opinion:

The functional lines between our marketing disciplines of PR, direct marketing and advertising are blurring. Social media marketing requires a blending of marketing and PR/communications skills. BTW, this line is blurring everywhere but it is more readily and immediately apparent in the social media world than offline. But it is offline too. Remember that online social networks are reflections of the interests and affiliations we have "in real life." Computer networks simply speed up the effect.

The other line that is blurring beyond recognition is the line between seller and buyer, journalist and audience. Now more than ever, we have multiple roles, sometimes almost simultaneously. A mommy blogger is a customer of a consumer products company, but at the same time, she might be a mompreneur with her own small or medium sized business. Journalists are bloggers; bloggers are journalists. Again, a reflection of similar real-world shifts, amplified by the Internet. We all gets lots of spam.

Whether social media marketing is a new marketing discipline, or simply a tectonic shift in Marketing with a capital M, I do not know. What I do know is that in order for it to thrive, for companies to be able to detect the real experts from the sham, for individuals to develop their skills to meet the new imperatives, we need to understand that it is a discipline. Not a project. Not an extension of PR or advertising or web marketing. Not something you can learn in a week from reading Naked Conversations and Boing-Boing.

You need a solid grounding in marketing and public relations. The social media component isn't separable from the marketing plan. Everything still needs to track back to the plan, the objectives, the business goals. It isn't enough to know HOW to do something. You need to know WHY. Real experience in the field helps. Extensive coursework or an undergraduate degree in psychology or sociology is very useful. Some philosophy too. A soupcon of "renaissance person" such as a second language and familiarity with great literature doesn't hurt.

Most of all, we need credibility for this new discipline. Provided in part surely by our ongoing practice. The good examples. But that alone isn't enough.

We need the supporting academic research. That is what gives any discipline its "legs." Without it, social media marketing is tactics. Campaigns. Maybe strategies. But not a legitimate discipline or profession in the long term. 

Which is why I encourage you to support the Society for New Communications Research, and specifically the  upcoming Annual Gala and Research Symposium to be held in Boston December 5th and 6th.

As practitioners, we need the information and insights from the research that will be presented at the Symposium, and that is reason enough to attend.  More importantly, we need to support  research organizations like SNCR because they provide part of the academic base. Can't attend, but wish you could? Send someone in your stead -- a junior colleague, a friend. No one to send? Make a supplemental donation to SNCR in support of the Symposium.

It can't happen without you.

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 10:11AM in Marketing, PR, Social media | Comments (5) | TrackBack (1)

Nov 13, 2007

Into the Fantastic Four, plus Good is getting better and upcoming attractions

Busy week, but I didn't feel I could let the third birthday of Marketing Roadmaps go unremarked. Thanks for sticking with me.

A quick update on the ongoing get.good.com saga. Thanks to the good offices of a Twitter friend who works for Good Technology's PR agency, I finally connected with someone. A real live person. Not sure there's a real solution, but at least we are talking.

Upcoming on the blog: a report on the Intuit Just Start campaign (thumbs up), some comments of the state of customer service in the US (thumbs go the opposite direction), details on the HP Photographic Memories project and more case studies on good blogger relations practice.

Here's to Year Four!

UPDATE 11/15/07: Too busy tonight to write a whole new post, but it looks like the people at Good Technology took some action and worked out something with Google to insert the Good Technology results on the first page of a search on "Getgood." Getgood.com still comes up first,as it should because it is the closest match, followed by a British ad campaign that also uses a "Get Good" theme,  but then they insert the results for Goodlink before returning all the pages from my blog and mentions of me and other Getgoods on blogs and websites. Amen. I will be so happy to not get these calls anymore. And I am sure the people trying to get customer service for their phones will be much happier too.

Tags: , ,

Posted @ 8:11PM in Blogger relations, Blogging, Marketing | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Nov 8, 2007

Intuit Just Start pulls into South Station Tuesday November 13th

Intuit, the publisher of the popular QuickBooks software, has taken its show on the road for the past month, holding two day events in NY, Chicago and Seattle to encourage entrepereneurs to just get started.

The campaign pulls into Boston's South Station next Tuesday and Wednesday.

At the events, entrepreneurs can get business, software and marketing advice from experts.  There's also a contest which will award $50K in cash and resources to a lucky business owner;  visit IWillJustStart.com for contest details.

I'll be there on Tuesday November 13th  from 11am-6pm to provide online marketing advice. Drop by if you are in the area.

You can also get a free copy of QuickBooks Simple Start financial software, if the opportunity to see me in person isn't enough of a draw :-)

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 5:11PM in Marketing, Web Marketing | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Nov 2, 2007

The week in PR: Blacklists, sex, education and breaking down walls

Well, the week started with the shot heard round the world, 21st century style: Chris Anderson, the editor in chief of Wired, blogged more than 300 email addresses that had spammed him in one form or another -- mistargeted pitches, unsolicited newsletters and so on -- in the past 30 days. And this followed right on the heels of Marshall Kirkpatrick's 5 bad pitches post the previous week.

I'm sure that a large number of the folks outed in Anderson's email were just in the wrong place (his email box) at the wrong time (October 07). They made a mistake. Do they deserve to be raked over the coals forever? No, and they won't be. They may never get off his list but I doubt it will ruin their reputations or their careers.

And some of them don't have reputations to ruin. Being on the Anderson blacklist won't affect them in the slightest because they will just get another email address and spam away. They don't care, and they never will.

Nevertheless, much online conversation ensued. Most commenters sympatized or empathized with Anderson's plight. Some approved of the tactic. Others understood the motivation but didn't approve of publishing the email addresses. The rant also spawned endless analysis of the state of PR, manifestos for change and the usual apologies for the bad behavior of the profession. [Too many to count, too many to link. To read the many screeds, here's the Google search and here is Technorati for the terms "Chris Anderson PR" ]

Some commentary was good, some less so, but, really, it all felt like more of the same to me. Public outcry over bad PR practice, much gnashing wailing and wringing, promises to do it better, to make it better, god damn it. But it doesn't seem to get better. Not really. This blog is almost three years old, and the more things change... 

The responsible practitioners of PR -- the good guys -- are still faced with unrealistic client expectations, a societal attitude that PR people are guilty until proven innocent and really bad PR practice from some members of the profession. Witness the truly juvenile behavior from two flacks, and I use this term deliberately, who used Anderson's rant as an excuse to engage in some mutual, public mudslinging and attempted client poaching. Perhaps someone told them that any PR is good PR? Umm, no, and if that's the sort of advice they give their clients...

And mixed up in the commentary was a theme started the week before by Jeremy Pepper in  PR will lose Social Media to Advertising Because of Sex, a manifesto of sorts for PR to change its ways or risk losing the "fight" for social media to the dreaded Marketers.

This is a far more interesting topic. No, not because of the sex. The title of the post was just a tease. Good tactic, that. I'll have to use it someday :-)

In my opinion,  we have to look at this conversation, this communication with our customers, with a completely different lens. Keep seeing it as a battle for supremacy, nobody wins. Not PR. Not marketing. Not the companies. And definitely not the customers.

In a post after the Anderson rant, Jeremy calls for better education, and that's a start. But I don't think it's enough.

We have to break down the functional walls between PR and marketing. PR isn't the rightful "master of social media" because of its traditional role as counselor, any more than marketing is because it has been the traditional channel to the customer.  You have to be able to do both, and you have to be willing to give up some of the most deeply held, profound assumptions about the "right" way to do things in the parent disciplines.

For example, press releases. Still useful, whether new or old form, when communicating with journalists, including journalistically inclined bloggers. Usefulness to customers. Not so much. The detached, impersonal format just doesn't tell them everything they need to know. Now, neither does a hyped up direct mail piece. Sure, direct response has its place, but it is generally to encourage action, not to share information.

I firmly believe a blogger wants a meld of both. An honest, open, relevant communication with a clear benefit statement that tells her WIIFM. What's In It For Me. To do this, you have to know, really know, what is in it for her. [Sidebar: I expect journalists would be happy if they got this much honesty too. More on that another time.]

The best social media marketing people won't be PR people. Or marketing people. They will have a skill set that blends both disciplines. Whether you are at an agency or in a company, start developing this -- in yourself, in your teams.

Stop worrying about whether PR or marketing is going to win. The answer is neither. And both.

The only thing that's certain? If you keep thinking of it as a fight, with a winner, you will be the loser.

That, and if you spam Chris Anderson, one strike and you're out.

Time to start breaking down some walls.

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 5:11PM in Marketing, PR, Social media | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Oct 25, 2007

Thirteen to One

In honor of last night's stupendous Red Sox performance in game one of the World Series, here are 13 things that I've been meaning to write about. Mostly social media and marketing related and in no particular order.

1. A new social network The Point  attempts to harness the power of collective action to bring causes to the tipping point. People and organizations post their causes on the site as an if/then. The basic idea is that if enough people do whatever the action is – if the cause tips, then some other thing would happen. Once it emerges from alpha, it could be an interesting vehicle for a company that is supporting a charitable cause. If enough individuals/customers do something (volunteer, quit smoking, whatever) then the company would do something as well -- donate money, sponsor an event, and so on. From Jeremy Pepper, who works for the company, via Twitter.

2. Last week Doug Haslam from Topaz Partners emailed me about a social media survey done by his client, community builder Prospero Technologies. What was most interesting about it, though, wasn't the survey. The sample size of 50 from a population of the company's customers is neither large nor random, and the results were pretty much what I'd expect given that population: generally positive about social media with no clear idea of what is working and what isn't. I do however give the company credit for actually asking its customers, rather than assuming.  What was most interesting was that Doug was pitching other marketing and communications bloggers; both Shel Holtz and BL Ochman wrote about the survey. If you wanted more tangible proof that the media landscape is shifting, this is it. We aren't just the media relations folks. With a nod to Dan Gillmor, we are the media. Ain't that a kick. Doug also blogged about this phenomenon.

3. "You could be a Durex Condom Tester and Win $1000"  Durex is pimping for recruiting condom testers on-line. Must be that new form of word-of-mouth: virile marketing (seen on Media Buyer Planner).

4. Do It Wrong Quickly: How the Web Changes the Old Marketing Rules by Mike Moran.  Not much news here for anyone already deep into social media marketing and communications, but a good read anyway. I'd recommend this as an intro text for experienced marketers who want to come up to speed quickly and get some practical advice on what they should do next.  Plus Moran is funny and he says lots of things I agree with  :-)  (via pitch from Peter Himler)

5. Society for New Communications Research is holding its annual Research Symposium & Gala in Boston December 5-6.

6. Kudos to Kami Huyse for spearheading liveblogging and twittering at the PRSA Annual Conference last week.

7. Andrea Weckerle has a good post on how social media has been, and will be, used in real-time disaster response. And if you twitter, make Ike Pigott happy and follow the Red Cross. 

8. Congratulations Josh Hallet, on joining Voce Communications and Geoff Livingston, on the publication of Now Is Gone.

9. I've been playing around a bit with Photrade, a new photo sharing site. It's now in closed beta but I have three invites. Email or twitter me if you want one.

10. Courtesy of Scott Baradell, a great example of why we should NOT write blog posts simply for search engine optimization.

11. Papeldance.

12. Thank you to all the PR and marcom students who have been  reading the blog and leaving comments. I love to hear from you, even if I disagree with you.

13. Are the comment spammers getting a little more clever? Check out this one on an old Marketing Roadmaps post, comment left up purely to use as an example. Someone less suspicious might not catch it as spam, as the comment is pretty innocuous. BUT: I almost always follow commenters back to their sites. It's a great way to discover new bloggers and get to know my readers better. AND: I am always a little suspicious when I get comments on really old posts.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Posted @ 1:10PM in Blogger relations, Blogging, Marketing, Media, PR, Social media, Social networks, Viral Marketing | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Oct 21, 2007

To blog or microblog?

Saturday morning, before I went into town to see Wicked, I had a little twitter-chat with Steven Streight "Vaspers the Grate" (quotation marks not superfluous) about blogging versus microblogging using Twitter, Jaiku et al.

Personally, I seem to be back in a "twitting" mode after a few months of just occasionally checking in. That, combined with the interchange with Vaspers got me thinking, again, about how blogging and microblogging fit in the total social media scheme, and especially how they both relate (or not)  to marketing communications.

Here's the back and forth over about a half hour before I had to leave for the play:

vaspers - Marketing experts *have* to be on Twitter. Fear of fast messaging and loss of narcissistic platform (slomo blogs) are two major impediments.
vaspers - "slomo blogs" = conventional blogs, where new posts take a whole day to appear, and comments accumulate less than every few seconds. LOL
sgetgood @vaspers but there is place for both slomo and microblog, it's not either/or
vaspers @sgetgood - Correct, but for a marketing expert to shun Twitter, Jaiku, Pownce, YouTube seems rather drearily Luddite and egotistic to me.
sgetgood @vaspers agree that is dumb to ignore twitter et al off to read about target
vaspers @sgetgood - I stick to my claim that slowmo bloggers hate the anonymity, loss of ego, loss of message control that microblogging represents
vaspers @sgetgood - I'm not trying to be mean-spirited to non-microblogging bloggers, just wondering why they resist the evolution of blogging
sgetgood @vaspers fear, control issues, attention disorders, difficulty following threads, not good at sensemaking

I agree with him 100% that to ignore the microblogging platforms, and particularly Twitter where so much of the microblogging conversation happens, is extremely shortsighted for any marketer,  particularly marketers in the tech space. The conversation that happens there is just as -- if not more -- important than the conversation that happens on our blogs, in email and through social networks like Facebook. And the reason some balk is most likely fear of losing message control. Just think about how PR pros stress about each and every word in a PR message. Those same messages that may be becoming the biggest anachronism in marketing communications today.

It's also hard sometimes to follow the disconnected conversation on Twitter. Nevertheless, that, in my personal opinion, is where the real power of the Twitter network is, and I'll get to that in a moment.

Microblogging doesn't replace blogging. Sometimes 140-characters won't do, and we need the longer format. I know very few bloggers who have completely abandoned their long format blog to just converse on Twitter. Blogs and microblogs have different roles.

The microblog. Twitter. Sure, it's where you can find out who is free for lunch and literally twitter on about nothing. But it is also fast and close to real-time. Not unlike the old news ticker. In fact, it is where news happens. Follow the thread and you can learn and influence the conversation much more rapidly than ever before.

The blog. The blog is for analysis. It's where, yes, as long as a day later, a blogger can sit down and put the perspective on the news and comments issued in rapid-fire bursts on Twitter. And it's where bloggers, and ultimately, reporters will write the longer stories about the things they read in Twitter. Like this post from BL Ochman about Spirit Airlines' customer service problems, which she initially read about  "via Twitter from Mack Collier."

But the thing I find most fascinating about Twitter is the discovery. Each user only sees the messages from the people he is following. When someone you know replies to someone you do not, you only see half the message. And that is the opportunity for discovery. If it interests you, you can follow the trail back, check out the Twitter profile of the unknown person (assuming it is a public profile)  and perhaps make a new acquaintance.  That is how social networks grow in interesting and unexpected ways.

And the real reason I think marketers who ignore the microblogging tools are missing out.

Tags: , , ,

Posted @ 10:10PM in Blogging, Marketing, Social media | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Oct 17, 2007

The lines they are a-blurring...

Over at Communication Overtones, Kami Huyse has proposed a "drip theory" for social media adoption. No, not that we are all drips, thank you very much. Her thesis is that social media is adopted slowly, by presenting it to clients/bosses in easily digested bits or drips :

"By adding in a few social media tactics at a time, they start to get the power of the medium and they tend to add a second, then a third element.  Soon, they are converts."

She concludes:

"Progress is achieved by the relentless drip of water weakening the established structure. When the dam finally gives way it looks like a revolution, but it really happened just one drip at a time."

A spirited discussion ensued in her comments, and I urge you to check it out.

Even before her post, I was thinking quite a bit about how companies and agencies adopt, or not, social media strategies. And the conclusion I keep coming to is that the traditional lines between the disciplines of public relations and marketing are blurring. Perhaps into a new discipline, but definitely into a new set of requirements.

Here's how it goes. A long time ago, when the earth was green....

Well maybe not that long ago.

It used to be clear. We had public relations and we had marketing. PR reached out to the press, which acted as intermediaries between companies and their customers.  There was a process, and everybody understood the rules of the game. It was all about news.

Marketing, on the other hand, developed programs and campaigns to communicate directly to customers. There was a process and everyone understood the rules. It was all about mutual benefit, mutual value.

Each side had its place, and rarely the twain did meet.

But it isn't that clear anymore.

When we talk to a blogger, we are talking to both an influencer and a customer. We need to bring both the marketing and the PR mindset, and skill set, into the conversation.

And that makes it hard. Because the traditional PR agency trains and reinforces the skill set necessary to reach out to intermediaries, reporters. Talking to customers? Not the strong suit.

And though marketers are often not much better, talking to the customer is a slightly more natural state for them, so it may be easier to make the transition. Once they stop calling them "consumers" that is.

The fact of the matter is that the lines between the two disciplines are blurring as a direct result of social media. You have to bring both sensibilities to the table. That means understanding that bloggers are influencers, often with as much, if not more, power than the mainstream media. It also means talking to them with enthusiasm, commitment, and caring -- just the way you would a valued customer. They don't need, or want, the studious detachment you practice when talking to reporters. They also don't want press releases with no cover note (pet peeve).

Learn how to meld the two skill sets when you reach out. It truly is adapt or die.

Or risk becoming the unicorn (YouTube video)

The Unicorn Song
words and music Shel Silverstein, performed by the Irish Rovers

A long time ago, when the Earth was green
There was more kinds of animals than you've ever seen
They'd run around free while the Earth was being born
And the loveliest of all was the unicorn

There was green alligators and long-necked geese
Some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees
Some cats and rats and elephants, but sure as you're born
The loveliest of all was the unicorn

The Lord seen some sinning and it gave Him pain
And He says, "Stand back, I'm going to make it rain"
He says, "Hey Noah, I'll tell you what to do
Build me a floating zoo,
and take some of those...

Green alligators and long-necked geese
Some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees
Some cats and rats and elephants, but sure as you're born
Don't you forget My unicorns

Old Noah was there to answer the call
He finished up making the ark just as the rain started to fall
He marched the animals two by two
And he called out as they came through
Hey Lord,

I've got green alligators and long-necked geese
Some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees
Some cats and rats and elephants, but Lord, I'm so forlorn
I just can't find no unicorns

And Noah looked out through the driving rain
Them unicorns were hiding, playing silly games
Kicking and splashing while the rain was falling
Oh, them silly unicorns

There was green alligators and long-necked geese
Some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees
Noah cried, "Close the door because the rain is falling
And we just can't wait for no unicorns

The ark started moving, it drifted with the tide
The unicorns looked up from the rocks and they cried
And the waters came down and sort of floated them away
That's why you never see unicorns to this very day

You'll see green alligators and long-necked geese
Some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees
Some cats and rats and elephants, but sure as you're born
You're never gonna see no unicorns

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 11:10AM in Blogging, Marketing, PR, Social media | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Oct 15, 2007

One more for the road and one for the Roadmap

I promise, I do have some actual marketing content in this post, but before I get back to the Roadmap, I've got one more comment "for the road" about the absurdity that is our national presidential elections.

You may recall my comments in earlier posts about how the media always seems to pay inordinate attention to the appearance and demeanor of female candidates -- hair, make-up, nature of their laugh. You know, the really important stuff that tells voters whether a candidate is qualified for elected office. You know, more important than the issues facing our country like the war, health care and the economy.

Well, I must extend kudos to USA Today and reporter Maria Puente for an interesting story on the front of the LIFE section this morning about how style is "an issue for '08".   The story presented a pretty balanced view of the media's obsession with the candidates' (and especially Hillary's) looks.

But the best was the sidebar on page 2 of the section that dissected what all the presidential candidates are wearing. Absolutely priceless. Absolutely perfect. Here are just some of the gems:

John Edwards

[...] Earlier this year, Edwards was captured on camera fussing over his hair. Then there were jeers when it came out that he spent $400, twice, on haircuts. But Edwards laughed off the criticism, spoofing the kerfuffle with his own video (featuring Hair from the Broadway musical).

Rudy Giuliani

The former New York mayor gets applause for finally giving up on the comb-over and accepting the realities of male-pattern balding. Now if only he could spiff up those oversized, un-stylish suits he sometimes wears.[...]

John McCain

[...] Then it was reported on Radar Online.com that he was miffed at his staff for dressing him like a metrosexual in a "gay" V-neck sweater over a T-shirt. McCain's campaign did not return calls seeking comment, then or now.

Mitt Romney

[...] Romney criticized Edwards on the haircuts, but then it came out that he had spent $300 on a makeup job before a debate. [...]

Go read it.

Now back to the roadmap. You remember, the Marketing Roadmap :-)

The media landscape is shifting. Right in front of our very eyes. Customers are increasingly taking control of their own brand experiences. Generating the content, deciding what is important. Targeting by behavior is more effective than demographics. It's not just about viral, it's about spreading the right message for the right result.

Now, if you've been active in social media marketing for the past few years, none of the above is news to you. At all. You already know that the traditional lines between PR and marketing are blurring. We aren't talking in isolation to influencers (the media) and customers. Intermediation is no longer the name of the game. We can, and must, talk directly with our customer, who is simultaneously both influencer and buyer. Forget about messages. We have to connect with people. Honestly. Authentically. No bullshit.

If you've been doing this for a while, you understand how important this new communication is to our brands, our companies, our survival. You've sucked that social media kool-aid right down. You get it.

But it can be hard for people to put their heads and arms around when faced with it for the first time. And there's no real way to cut the learning curve down. You just have to jump in.

Now, I am always suspicious of business experts who don't actually do what they write about, so I viewed Larry Weber's new book,  Marketing to the Social Web: How Digital Customer Communities Build Your Business, with a bit of a jaundiced eye. Sure, he has the PR background but I'm not sure he even has a blog...  How much could he really know about marketing to the social web without doing it? Without being in it?

Well, I can't answer that question, but I just read an excerpt from his new book in BrandWeek, and while I'm not sure I'd get much new information from the book,  I was pleased with the 12 steps he outlined for companies to follow toward an interactive future.

Which makes me think his book might be a good intro for brand marketers and PR execs.  Budget is tight right now, so I don't plan to buy the book, but I'd love to hear from my readers if it is any good. And of course, Larry Weber, John Wiley & Sons, if you send me a review copy, I will read it.

Books are pretty much the only things I do review here.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Posted @ 9:10PM in Gender, Marketing, Politics/Policy, Social media | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Oct 3, 2007

Contests. Sweepstakes. Prizes. Liability? Oh my!

Contests on blogs. Everybody loves them. The blogger loves them because they often bring new readers. Readers love them because they might get free stuff and a mention on a popular blog. Companies who donate prizes love them because their products are mentioned on the blogs.

It’s a win for everyone.

Except, what if someone has an issue with the contest? What’s the liability of the blogger if someone complains about how the contest was run? It seems so odd to ask this question, given the overwhelmingly positive spirit of most contests on blogs.

I’ve done a contest with some friends through my personal blog Snapshot Chronicles, and it was nothing but fun – for me, for my friends and for the people who entered.

Then again, the prizes, while cool, weren’t of excessively high value. Camera cases, photo frames, pens and ball caps [thank you again Photojojo and HP], not trips to Europe and TVs. This is generally the case with most blog contests; the prizes are desirable but nothing to sue over.

Well, maybe not. Remember, there are folks who enter contests as a revenue stream, not just as a fun activity. For them, it is serious business. And the value of the prizes continues to rise.

What happens if someone decides it wasn’t fair, and decides to raise a stink? What is the liability of the blogger? How can she protect herself? Does the company donating the prize have any liability?

Companies who run contests, large and small, spend a lot of time and money reviewing terms and conditions. Bloggers cannot do the same, but my blogging colleague David Wescott and I decided to do a little research and offer some guidance.

I spoke with Donna DeClemente, a marketer who specializes in helping companies with contest promotions, and David spoke with Stephanie Himel-Nelson, who blogs at Lawyer Mama among other places. Read on for my post and go to David’s blog It’s Not A Lecture for his post.

My interest was both professional and personal. Let’s cover the professional first. If you have a product that is relevant and exciting for the blogger, and you can give him something to give away on his blog, do it! Makes everybody happy, and I love making everybody happy. I recommend this to clients that have appropriate products, and am in the middle of such a project right now – more soon – which is one of the reasons I started thinking about this issue.

Personally. While I do not do contests on this blog, I have done one on Snapshot Chronicles, and absolutely intend to do more. And I like my house, so I’d prefer to keep it. Do I have any liability when I run a contest?

Let’s hear from an expert. I met Donna DeClemente, who blogs at Donna’s Promo Talk, at BlogHer. She attends the promotional marketing law conference sponsored by the Promotional Marketing Association every year to stay up to speed with the regulations, and helps companies and bloggers like my friend Yvonne DiVita create contests and draft Official Rules.

I asked her about the different types of contests.

Donna: A sweepstakes is a random drawing that anyone who meets the eligibility requirements as written in the “Official Rules” may enter. Contests are different from sweepstakes. They are not just games of chance. The winner of a contest must provide a degree of individual skill or uniqueness. A contest also takes more work since all entries must be judged and/or evaluated. A raffle is a type of lottery in which prizes are awarded to people who pay for a chance to win. They are strictly to be used only as a fundraising tool by a non-profit organization. The rules vary greatly from state to state and should be reviewed carefully. A qualifying organization usually must complete an application. Raffles also are not allowed to be conducted or advertised over the Internet. (See David’s interview with Lawyer Mama for more on lotteries-SG)

Give me some general guidelines for holding a contest or random drawing.

Donna: The sponsor of a contest or sweepstakes, whether a company or an individual, assumes full responsibility for the contest. It is very important that a set of “Official Rules” be drafted and everyone who is eligible to enter have access to the rules. Once you have a set of Official Rules, you must follow these rules and not change them during the course of the contest. If you stick by them, then you should be clear of any liability if someone claims fraud or misrepresentation. For example, see the Lipsticking.com sweepstakes.

The key elements that must be included in the rules include the official sponsor, eligibility requirements, the start and end date and time of the promotion, description of the prize(s) and their value, and how to enter. (For example, as Lawyer Mama found when she dug into the issue, some states have very strict disclosure and eligibility requirements and you either have to meet them, or exclude residents of those states from your sweepstakes or contest. Explains why sometimes you see a national contest with various state exclusions or differing terms for different states - SG)

What about the company donating the prizes? Does it have any liability?

Donna: If a company is donating a prize(s) for the promotion and is not the sponsor, than they are not liable. However, it is up to them to provide a detailed description of the prize and the true ARV (average retail value). For anyone that receives a prize worth $600 or more, you must create a 1099 and the winner is liable for taxes.

Should a blogger seek legal advice about her sweepstakes or drawing?

Donna: If you are worried about the potential consequences or your program is really complex or unique, you should absolutely seek advice. But you really need to make sure that any lawyer you retain is up to speed on promotional law, and most small business and personal lawyers are not. They can do the research, but you are probably better off consulting a specialist. I’d recommend that people start by consulting a promotional specialist like me, because we can also help with other aspects of the sweepstakes like fulfillment and contest structure. Typically, I can handle most issues that come up, but if we do need a lawyer, I work with two expert promotional lawyers on a regular basis.

---

Check out Donna’s blog and Web site for more information on running a contest on your blog or Web site. And if you have any doubts or questions about a contest you’d like to conduct on your blog, especially if you have a very high value prize, get advice. A specialist like Donna can help, but at the end of the day, if you are doing something very unique, it is probably worth the call to a lawyer. The legal fee pales in comparison to the nuisance of a lawsuit if you have to deal with, in the words of Fake Steve, a “frigtard.”

Some additional resources, courtesy of Lawyer Mama:
http://www.wcsr.com/default.asp?id=534&objId=31
http://promomagazine.com/legal/marketing_staking_states/
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Laws/California/
http://www.ct.gov/AG/cwp/view.asp?A=1772&Q=282452
http://www.dwt.com/practc/advertising/bulletins/09-05_FloridaSweepstakes.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3629/is_199408/ai_n8713060

SUSAN IS NOT A LAWYER
This information is meant to bring awareness to the topic and is not intended to be used as legal advice. If you have questions about any of the information above or related matters, please contact an attorney licensed in your state.(Thanks, Lawyer Mama, for the disclaimer language)

Tags: , ,

Posted @ 11:10AM in Business Management, Marketing, Social media | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Sep 22, 2007

Social Media Club Boston: Fake Steve, Wal-Mart and Forrester Research

Last Thursday's Social Media Club Boston meeting was terrific. And oh so funny.  Kudos to Greg PC for assembling such a great panel, and to the moderator and speakers for doing such a brilliant job.

John Cass has done a great job summarizing the session, so I will just share some photos, soundbites and general observations.

Moderator Monika Maeckle, VP Southwest Region, Business Wire (sponsor of the evening) A delightful and charming woman who did a great job moving the conversation along, involving the audience, but never losing control of the session.

And the esteemed panel:

left to right: Josh Bernoff, Forrester; Dan Lyons, aka Fake Steve Jobs, Forbes Magazine; Steve Restivo, Wal-Mart

As John Cass reported, Dan Lyons was the hit of the evening. Some of his bon mots:

On his Attack of the Blogs article: "I wished I had a do-over."

On Valleywag: "Valleywag sucks."    

On Jonathan Schwartz, Sun: "How different is Jonathan Schwartz's blog from a fake blog?"  [Note, if this comment resonates, be sure to check out My Little Pony.]

As John reported in his post, Dan said many people knew who FSJ was well before the New York Times exposed the secret. In a brief conversation after the panel, Dan said he was impressed that they were all able to keep the secret. He said a few of them even helped mess with Valleywag on who FSJ was. Gotta love it. Unless you are Owen Thomas I suppose.

Josh Bernoff was polished and articulate. I really liked his comment that starting a "social media" project by picking a technology is ass-backward. The POST model he shared really resonated:

    First: PROFILE your customer.  

    Second: Define your OBJECTIVES.

    Third: Develop a STRATEGY -- how do you want to change people

    Then, and only then, decide on the TECHNOLOGY.

 

Another great quote from Josh: "Only one group of people that this (social media) is really bad for -- liars."

Steve Restivo from Wal-Mart did a great job representing his company, although it was clear that he was constrained by a corporate role, unlike the other panelists, who are encouraged (and compensated I am sure) to have strong public personas. Nevertheless I was impressed by both his acknowledgment of past mistakes like RV-ing Across America and his frank statement that competitor Target does a great job online.

The Social Media Club has chapters in a number of cities; check it out. And if you are in Boston, see you next time.

Tags: , , , ,

Posted @ 7:09PM in Blogging, Ethics, Fake/Fictional Blogs, Marketing, Social media | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Aug 30, 2007

Getting Web site development right

Two of the most popular search terms for this blog are "b2b website" and "corporate websites suck." The second due to a 2005 post called Why Corporate Websites Suck and some ideas for fixing them.

But, as I was writing a memo about site development for a client, I realized that I haven't written about Web development here in quite some time. Since people seem to be coming here for just that sort of information, seems like I should rectify that :-)

So here's a step by step outline that covers the most important part of the process: defining the requirements and navigation for the site. I strongly believe that you must have a clear picture of the path(s) you want your visitors to take through your site, to get to the desired result, before you commit one line of code or design a single page.

These are the steps I follow. Every time. New site or redesign.

1. Assemble a team that represents the key stakeholders in the site. You do not need every individual, but you do want to be sure that the representatives are truly cross-functional. In some cases, you will want someone from the actual business area. In others, it may be more effective to have members of your team interview the relevant people. Some of the functions that should be included are sales,  marketing, business development, communications and customer service.

I do not recommend having the Web designers or developers too involved in this stage. You want to keep the discussion at a business level until you have a solid idea of what is needed across the company. Developers often get too wrapped up in how to do something rather than what is necessary, which should be the focus early in the process. Involving developers too early also can steer the discussion toward what the developers can do easily rather than what the company really wants. Later, when you get to the development stage, you may make concessions due to cost or complexity but it is too limiting and undermines creativity to start this way.

2. Once the team is assembled, the first order of priority is to identify the objectives for the Web site. These objectives should be closely aligned with your overall business goals. Some of the questions to ask:
a. Who are you trying to reach?
b. Why?
c. What do you want to tell them?
d. What do you want them to do once they are at the site?
e. What are the priorities of the business now and for the next three years?

It is helpful to pull the web stats from the existing site to better understand what your site visitors are doing. What areas get the most traffic? What are people coming to your site to see and do? It’s okay to let the team refer to areas on the current site that they feel need to be kept or improved, but don’t let them get bogged down in what they don’t like or think does not work. The point of this work is to develop a specification for the new site; rehashing previous decisions, good or bad, is not useful and slows down the process.

You are going to have multiple audiences and multiple objectives – everything from sales to customer service to media outreach to things very specific to your business plan. This is exactly what you want at this stage.

3. Next, you determine pri