Information architecture isn’t enough. Sure, it’s important – I gave some tips just two weeks ago – but it’s not the only organizing structure we need to consider.

That said, it may be confusing when I wholeheartedly recommend you attend the upcoming IDEA 2008 conference held by the Information Architecture Institute on October 7-8 in Chicago. The reason I suggest it is because they don’t just stop at information architecture – the conference examines the interaction and engagement that is possible in a web 2.0 world. (Note – This post is in no way sponsored by this or any other organization. It’s just me talking here.)

By the end of this post, I aim to convince you of the importance of the emerging engagement design, how companies can use it to grow business, how agencies will change in response, and finally persuade you to study engagement design at IDEA 2008 or elsewhere.

There’s No Marketing Funnel In Web 2.0

This blog is based on the idea that marketing is changing – rapidly and fundamentally. Forrester Research describes a key component:

“The marketing funnel is a broken metaphor that overlooks the complexity social media introduces into the buying process. As consumers’ trust in traditional media diminishes, marketers need a new approach. We propose a new metric, engagement, that includes four components: involvement, interaction, intimacy, and influence.”

We need to look at information architecture and engagement design in exactly this way. Imagine that information architecture is the skeleton – very web 1.0 – organizing and presenting information in a way the webmaster believes is most beneficial.

Now, imagine engagement interaction as the body and soul in web 2.0. Instead of guessing what will most benefit her readers, webmasters can (must!) interact with her readers to determine how they use her website.

Businesses Engaging To Sell

Business is changing as well. In the report Use Personas To Design For Engagement, Forrester outlines three business who, with the help of their agencies, harnessed engagement interaction through the use of personas. These businesses found the key to interaction design through:

• Analytics: QVC and Critical Mass rated website functions on their usefulness to particular users and designed the website around those highly-rated features.
• Usability: Thornburg Mortgage and Enlighten ensured that their new website features truly served their current and potential customers.
• Advocacy: St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and WHITTMANHART provided supporters with a website that kept them more involved as well as facilitated their donations.

In all three cases, harnessing engagement design resulted in huge increases in business.

Agencies Need To Change Too

As IDEA 2008 speaker and engagement savant David Armano described in this video, the roles in your marketing agency need to change to accommodate this shift in business. David claims that engagement design exists as the design of behavior with three elements: human, technical, aesthetic.

Of course, this requires a very different agency layout with IT sitting over in the corner, the writers up in the loft, and the designers on another floor altogether. Formerly siloed roles are becoming both more blurry and moving closer together. Creative departmental overlap will be key as we move to a user-focused model.

Forget the days of the “star” designer. As Malcolm Gladwell describes in The Talent Myth, “the organizations that are most successful at [coordinating efforts of many different people] are the ones where the system is the star.”

It’s a wildly exciting time. Again from David: “Marketing, design and ‘branding’ are on a violent collision course as communications, experience and messaging become indistigusible [sic] to the average customer/user.”

So Who Cares?

Well, hopefully you. Readers of this blog are usually keenly attuned to marketing, advertising, PR, and social media. And it is this world that is changing.

Events like IDEA 2008 are essential for hearing from the best minds in the business and plotting out how your business or agency can flourish in a web 2.0 world. My boss recently sent me to an IA conference run by Adaptive Path and I found it immensely useful.

I’m not sure if I’ll be going to IDEA 2008 myself (sponsor now being accepted!), but I encourage you to attend. Like I mentioned, this blog is all about the changing world of business and marketing. Hearing from the best minds in the business can only help you.

Watch this blog for updated about my attendance. If I do go, I will do my best to live blog and tweet while there. Until then, think about how your organization can harness engagement design. I promise that your customers and supporters will thank you for it.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Courtesy of gapingvoid

In their new September issue, Fast Company magazine features a fascinating story about the comedy web video business and how it’s almost impossible to make these websites profitable.

They lay out many of the current business models, but I think an addendum is useful. In this post, I will outline a mindset that hurts that industry, what the current business model is and why it doesn’t work, a suggestion to ensure profitability, and the business model that can make an online video site profitable.

First, The Mindset

We tend to think about web videos as a “thing.” It is a product. It is content.

Forget this mindset. If you’re a video producer, web video might be a tangible thing that comes from tangible people sitting around your tangible office. But it’s not.

For your audience, web video is an experience. There’s no actual product for the viewer – the video elevates the spirits or gives us hope or connects us to others. It has more in common with a trip to Disneyland than it does with buying razor blades.

So stop thinking of a video as a commodity and start thinking of it as an experience you provide for your viewer.

Second, The Model

As the Fast Company article points out, the prevailing business model is advertiser-based. This has been the case for most things in the U.S. for more than half a century.

However, the advertiser business model cannot support web video. Consider it: the marketplace is fragmented, niche sites have the most loyal visitors, online is still new to many advertisers, audience has a decreased appetite for ads, and the content (at least on the comedy sites) is oftentimes…edgy, to put it diplomatically.

Even off-shoots of the advertiser model don’t work, such as product placement and sponsored shows. The huge conglomerates that have the money to invest in these small comedy sites only know these sorts of models – give the product away in exchange for some advertiser time.

No matter how many times you throw money at the problem, this business model still doesn’t work.

But that doesn’t mean web videos will never be profitable. (Misters Murdoch and Branson, please have your assistants print out the following explanation.)

One Suggestion

First, just a suggestion: keep the suits as far away from the video production as possible. Nothing kills comedy like business people.

You want to appeal to college kids? Hire college kids or recent grads to do the show. Fast Company points out the CollegeHumor.com, a site still operated by the creators, plays well with YouTube and still cleans up at the bank.

“The site has attracted advertisers such as Motorola, Fox, and Subaru and reaped $4.2 million in ad revenue during the first quarter of the year. CollegeHumor is profitable – the only profitable major comedy-video site.”

You do what you’re good at and hire people to do what they’re good at. (This applies to most businesses, not just online video, by the way.)

One Solution

OK, you’ve been waiting for that business model that will work better than advertising, right? This is how major media companies can succeed with online video.

Here it is, step by step, just for you titans of business:

• Take all the money you would spend on focus groups and market research.
• Invest this money into your online video business.
• (Once the site is up, collect the bits of ad revenue and re-invest it.)
• Use the website to do all the market research you would have done for your other shows.

Web video sites can be profitable when the “product” is not the web video. Websites are the perfect venue for market research. You can find out anything you want – people are dying to share their opinion for free!

Can’t decide between jokes for a sitcom? Film them both and let the website audience vote. Feature pilot shows on your website and only air the most popular ones. The money you save from traditional research and focus groups (much less money lost in terrible shows you would have aired), will more than pay for your video website.

Eventually the website might make money and that’s fabulous. Until then, use it as a seed bed. Test out new acts, try out new jokes, ask your audience’s opinion, and gauge their interests. Web video sites can have immense value if they are viewed as research laboratories instead of content production facilities.

But what do you think? Maybe advertising just isn’t being done correctly for these online comedy sites to become profitable? Maybe a subscription model like The Bitterest Pill podcast would work? Let me know what you think in the comments section below.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Courtesy of jbhill via Flickr

Journalism is at a crossroads, with two distinct groups voicing their opinions.

On one side, many journalists don’t buy the trend toward social media and have their heads firmly entrenched in the sand. They believe in their readership’s loyalty and claim that social media is a passing fad.

One the other side, other journalists have fully embraced the social media tools at their disposal and go so far as to trumpet the death of journalism. They expect newspapers to close up shop; the death knell of print news is a symphony of tweets.

Aren’t the two views mutually exclusive? Which one is correct?

Personally, I believe they are both wrong. Some newspapers will outlast social media and some have already been taken down by it. The basic truth is that some people love getting their news from social media like Facebook, Twitter, and FriendFeed, while others will never replace their tangible newspaper-with-coffee routine.

This post will explain, however, that newspapers and journalists who use social media – in effect integrate these two seemingly opposing ideas – will likely be the long-term winners. There is no doubt that the old ways are changing. Journalists who refuse to accept that should begin cleaning up their resumes.

But major news networks need not shutter the windows quite yet. Embracing this change could be the key to stopping the newspaper industry’s slow (and recently not so slow) slide into irrelevance.

An Industry In Turmoil

You don’t have to look far for evidence that the newspaper industry is in trouble, and this has been a trend for several years. The New York Times reported that 2006 saw one of the steepest declines in the newspaper industry ever. In 2007, the Audit Bureau of Circulations reported a continued 3% decline across the board. This pattern involves not only newspaper sales, but the related topics of ad sales and job cuts.

So where have all the readers gone? You guess it – the internet. The NYT title says it all: “More Readers Trading Newspapers For Web Sites.” Or how about “Newspaper Circulation In Steep Slide Across Nation.” Get the picture?

A (Social) World Of Solutions

So, in these tough times, what if there was a way for newspapers to:

• Create a sense of loyalty to a particular magazine
• Develop brand advocates (word of mouth ambassadors)
• Provide more relevant news
• Link into a network of concerned citizens
• Increase pageviews and (connected to increased traffic) increase revenue

A recent article by Todd Andrlik about The Chicago Tribune’s recent forays into the social media space illustrates a newspaper who has done just that. Here’s a quick run-down of the results of their efforts:

• Traffic: Social media efforts are responsible for an 8% increase in pageviews.
• Market research: “‘Essentially, social media gives us a year-round, real-time focus group to monitor conversations and keep us in tune with what consumers are thinking,’ said Bill Adee, associate managing editor for innovation and head of the Tribune’s social media task force.”
• More relevant content: The Tribune created a special section on the website about Chicago’s O’Hare airport directly based on the conversation they heard on Twitter.
• A network of citizen journalists: The newspaper recently broke a story about a bomb scare at the Daley Building after being tipped off my concerned followers on Twitter.
• Positive local and national PR: Serving as a example (and occasionally picking up the tab at tweet-ups) has the tangential benefit of blog posts just like this one and hundreds more online.

Flash In The Pan Or Gem Of A Strategy?

Maybe the successful efforts are a momentary success. After all, despite the success found through social media, I’m sure things are still tight over at The Tribune.

And yet, more and more smart people are figuring out that social media enhances the journalistic work they do. For instance, marketer and author Peter Shankman’s “Help A Reporter Out” connects journalists with possible sources. Formerly journalists had to pay for such a service, but Shankman does it all for free. He gets notoriety out of the deal and a little advertising, but the more than 20,000 subscribers seem to think it’s worthwhile.

Likewise, MyCreativeTeam introduced a wiki list of journalists who use Twitter to connect PR people with journalists and media outlets. The list has grown exponentially since it first began and you can read more about it here.

One can only assume that the hundreds or thousands of journalists using these services are getting something out of them. Staying connected, developing sources, staying in touch with your community readership, providing more value – don’t these sound like smart business goals for newspapers and the journalists who run them?

Final Assessment

Frankly, I don’t think newspaper will go away entirely. It’s difficult to imagine a Norman Rockwell-esque scene in which Father Dearest whips out his blackberry to connect to the Twitter stream rather than reading his paper by the fire.

However, the journalists and newspapers who deny the use of social media – for themselves or their audience – might as well have targets painted on their backs. Your days are numbered.

But, if you take the route of The Chicago Tribune, Shankman’s HARO, and MyCreativeTeam’s journalist Twitter wiki, you may reap rewards you never expected. Experiment, have fun, but also measure the results again your business goals and reassess accordingly. Journalists should not – heck, cannot – avoid social media. But if they get wise to the tool, it may become one of their greatest assets.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Let’s talk blog promotion.

I was really glad when Chris Brogan posted this post last week regarding StumbleUpon because I’ve been meaning to write something similar. If you check out the image at the top of this post, you will see a list of top referring sites that have led back to my blog since I began. StumbleUpon is not only at the top of the list, but mentioned several times throughout the list.

(Background: StumbleUpon is a social voting/referral tool. After joining for free, you download the SU toolbar. As you go about your daily business, you have the option of giving a thumbs up or a thumbs down to any page. Likewise, you can connect with friends and “stumble” across sites they have liked.)

Like Chris, I have had lots of traffic thanks to StumbleUpon and highly recommend it. In this blog post, I will give you some helpful advice about using StumbleUpon and then list some other similar sites and why they didn’t work as well for me.

Best Practices For StumbleUpon

You can find some great online resources with SU advice, but here are my personal recommendations:

• Don’t just vote for your stuff. When I started, I was thumbing up my own work only. This must be a big no-no because I received almost no traffic with this method.
• Get involved in the community. Duh, I should have known this one. The more friends I made, the better recommended pages were for me and the more eyeballs who would see my posts.
• At high tide, all ships rise. Like all good web 2.0 tools, this is an “and” economy. Your posts don’t suffer because you thumb up someone else’s. Give thumbs up to authors you trust and SU seems to give you more props for knowing good content.
• Don’t be a pimp. I don’t stumble all of my posts. I wait until someone else does (which seems to give more stumble-juice) or I only thumb up my best material. This seems to give more “weight” to the ones I do choose.
• The more you give, you more you get. SU has given me another opportunity to connect with some of the brightest folks I’ve ever met. Don’t try to game the system – you will receive as much or more than you invest into it.

Notice what’s not on that list of referrals at the top? Most of the other social voting/referral sites. Here is my run-down on some of the more prominent ones in this space. (This is just what I have personally observed. If you’ve had success with these, more power to ya.)

Digg

I have only had a few articles go into the double digits of diggs. But even with those, I never garnered much traffic at all. Granted, I also have not put in the time to become a top digger, either.

Tech stories, great headlines, and lad humor seem to do well on digg; the blogging, writing, social media, marketing space…not so much. That’s why I don’t bother with digg.

Sphinn

Have you ever had a cat who vomited randomly in a hidden corner of the house and then, days afterwards, you are searching down the smell, trying to figure out where it’s coming from? This is how I feel about Sphinn.

I do not have anything against the site or the folks on it. But it’s strange that the articles that do the best are often of the questionable, SEO nature. Or that people who “sphinn” my stuff are those who have just published (indicating to me that they want a return sphinn). Or the lack of useful conversation. It just doesn’t feel right, you know?

I have had a little success pulling traffic from Sphinn postings (always less than 10 people on any given day), so I have not abandoned the method, but I decided to put my efforts elsewhere.

Mixx, PlugIM, BizSugar

The returns simply have not matched the effort. I have to go to the site to participate (rather than through a toolbar like SU) and I just don’t have the time. My initial efforts did not make a ripple in my traffic and I don’t visit much.

That said, you will notice Mixx.com on the list above. A friend recommended one of my articles and he must have had some referral power because I got some traffic on that day. However, on my own, I just don’t have the friends, juice, or time.

So, StumbleUpon It Is?

Well, it is for me. My main piece of advice, however, would be to choose a network and commit to it. Joining a half-dozen social voting sites will dilute your efforts. I guarantee you will get more traffic by working through just one or two voting networks.

And SU is not perfect. As I mentioned on Chris’ post, I think the quality of traffic is much lower. People tend to bounce from one site to another. (I can tell because I convert a much lower percentage to subscribers and they generally do not click around the site to other posts.)

However, the truth remains that higher traffic is better than lower traffic, of course. With more visitors comes more chance of being linked to from another blog, getting a mention on Twitter, or of getting another thumbs up on SU.

Does This Help?

I hope you found this post useful. (If so, stumbling this article is appreciated.) If you would like to connect to me on StumbleUpon, you can find me at http://onlinemarketer.stumbleupon.com/.

Or, tell me if I’m wrong. Maybe I missed a memo on Mixx or I don’t deserve to be dugg (or you’re annoyed by the alarming alliteration). Share your success stories or suggestions with everyone in the comments section below.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Courtesy of aaardvaark via Flickr

You may have heard of Twitter and be a little confused. Early adopters have been playing around with it for a couple of years, but Twitter finally seems to be making it into the mainstream.

This is a brief users guide for those curious about how it works, wondering about its value, and wanting to get the most from the experience.

What Is Twitter?

Twitter is commonly referred to as “micro-blogging.” While this is an accurate description, I’ve found that it confuses some people (non-bloggers especially).

Imagine it is a post-it note. You don’t have a lot of space (140 characters) so brevity is required. When you jot something down on your post-it note, it gets stuck to your refrigerator door, much like you might do at home. However, in this scenario, anyone can see the notes posted on your frig. And you can see anyone else’s.

How Does It Work?

Like most web 2.0 applications, the best advice is to just try it out. (You can’t do it wrong and you won’t break it – just give it a whirl.)

You sign up with a name of your choice. After that, find people you know or are interested in following. Twitter can pull from your email contacts to see if your friends and family already have Twitter accounts.

Twitter accounts are identified with an “at” symbol in front. So when discussing your Twitter account, you would say @YourName. Events use a hash mark. For instance, you can search for all Olympic tweets using #080808.

You can view anyone’s notes (or “tweets”) and anyone can sign up to view yours. Don’t worry – you will get an email letting you know every time someone follows you.

And of course, all of this is free.

Avoid These Common Pitfalls

• No blatant marketing!: Some marketers will try to market their product over Twitter. Let me save you some time: It doesn’t work. If all of your tweets are about your wonderful, fantabulous product which I can BUY NOW, I will know you’re full of it. People aren’t stupid.
• Needy: At the risk of offending folks, avoid looking needy. If you follow 1,000+ people and only 2 follow you, I’m going to wonder why.
• Friends before tweets: Play around with Twitter before you go introducing yourself. Sure, follow people you know at first, but focus on actually tweeting. Get a couple dozen tweets up before you attempt to make friends you don’t actually know in real life. It gives them a sense of who you are and what you’re interested in.

What Are The Positives?

• It’s fun – you instantly have access to very interesting people
• It’s a good PR tool (after you build a community)
• It’s an ultra-specific source of news

What Are The Negatives?

• It’s extremely addictive
• Sometimes it can verge on minutiae
• Frequent downtime

Separation Of Church And State

If you get really into Twitter, you may want to opt for multiple accounts. There’s no restriction on this – you just need separate email addresses to link to them. This is common for small business owners who want a distinct account for their business as well as their personal accounts.

For instance, my personal tweets are at @DJFrancis but all marketing/advertising/communications tweets can be found at my blogs account, @MarketerBlog. Feel free to follow whichever account best applies to you. (If you are reading this blog, I imagine the latter.)

I find this an easy separation to make and better for my readers. I recommend only setting up multiple accounts once you are comfortable with Twitter. Also, you may want to consider Netvibes or a similar solution to managing your discrete accounts.

Was This Helpful?

Please feel free to comment below if I missed anything. I hope you found this helpful.

If you try Twitter and like it, here are some other suggestions for those in the marketing and social media world: @chrisbrogan, @copyblogger, @jowyang, @jaffejuice, @mitchjoel, @shannonpaul, @jasonfalls, @drewmclellan, @MyCreativeTeam, and @armano.

For more basic information, check out these articles from Newsweek, PC World, and Fortune magazine.

Please consider subscribing to this blog if you want to know more about marketing in a web 2.0 world (free, natch). I offer both email and RSS options. Also, if you like learning about social media, tune in tomorrow when I tackle StumbleUpon and a few of the other social voting/news sites with a special emphasis on marketing and business.

And please feel free to make one of your first tweets a link to this article, but only if you found it useful. Thanks!

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Courtesy of jbhill via Flickr

Marketers are confused these days. The things that have worked for decades aren’t working anymore. Can you imagine if you worked for 30 years in your given vocation and then, almost over night, all the rules changed?

In truth, marketing is only now becoming what it truly should have been – a conversation. Less lies, less spin. Marketers have been shoveling marshmallow fluff down the mouths of Americans and telling them it’s broccoli. And suddenly, as quick as you can confuse metaphors, we find that the emperor has no clothes.

I admit I’ve been frustrated with the old-school marketers. “What is with these guys, and why can’t they get it together?” But that’s not fair. Their whole world has shifted beneath them. I came to a better understanding watching a recent Robert Scoble interview with IBM engineer Mike Moran. (I highly encourage you to check it out: Robert Scoble’s interview with Mike Moran. It’s only 12 minutes long and well worth your time.)

Moran gives a cogent explanation of why marketers are having such a difficult time in the new web 2.0 environment. Here is a small sample:

“The change that’s really happening is you have to learn how to attract people to your message rather than pushing it at them. You have to figure out how you’re going to listen when they talk back. And you also have to watch what they do. Those three things are really critical because once you do them, you have to figure out how to respond.

Those three things are really critical because once you do them, you have to figure out how to respond. When I say ‘Do it wrong quickly,’ it’s not you trying to do it wrong, it’s that you kind of admit that what you’re doing is probably wrong because it usually is. And then you have to look back at the feedback from your target market to see how far off it is so that you know what to do next. And that’s really a tough change for a lot of marketers.

That seems really simple, but think of it: a whole industry has changed in a matter of what, less than a decade? That is pretty outstanding. It’s going from monologue to dialogue, from lecture to conversation, from directing to caring, from crossed fingers to metrics.

Likewise, David Meerman Scott had this to say a couple of weeks ago at Podcamp Boston 3 on an edition of the Marketing Over Coffee podcast:

You truly have to think differently than you ever have before, if you’ve been a marketer or PR person throughout your whole career. So many people have an idea of what marketing and public relations is. Marketing is typically advertising and you interrupt people and you coerce them to do something. And PR is you convince a handful of journalists to talk about your stuff.

Everything we’re talking about here [at Podcamp Boston 3] is about creating something interesting that doesn’t talk about your product and service – no one cares about your product and service – but gets an idea across.”

All of this then reminded me of an excellent post by Josh Klein. (You really ought to subscribe to his blog. Seriously.) He was speaking about roughly the same topic, with a special focus on television. And Josh nails it when he talks about how things have changed with the internet.

“The internet wasn’t built for businesses, it was built to share information, first for the military and later for academics. Business has grown out of this original purpose, but it wasn’t the intention…

The web is not a passive medium. It’s built for engagement.

Why do companies insist on putting up brochureware websites, then wonder why nobody is visiting? Who gave them the right to take up valuable cognitive space without providing anything of value? This brings us back to the line that got axed from my presentation.

‘Nobody cares about you.’”

Do you see how these three quotes all fit together into a meme? Moran says everything has changed and failure is good. Scott says you must create instead of interrupt. And Klein says this medium is built for engagement and, to engage, you must focus on the desires of the customer (not yourself or your company).

No one cares about your product, you’re doing it wrong, and that is awesome.

No wonder this scares the pants off the old-school marketers – I don’t blame them! Everything went topsy-turvy all of a sudden. A type of newspeak has become the norm (i.e. sell by not selling, convince by entertaining, fail to succeed).

Researching all of this has made me a little more understanding; it has made the hand-holding necessary in our industry a little more tolerable. I encourage you – whatever your age or experience – to consider the great shift in marketing when you deal with the old-school folks.

Do you think I’m correct or am I totally off base? I’d love to hear what you think in the comments section below.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Digg it

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Courtesy of recursion_see_recursion via Flickr

Information architecture isn’t sexy. In fact, good information architecture (or “IA”) shouldn’t be something your website visitors even notice.

Information architecture is basically how your site is designed. We’ve all seen site maps – those are basically outlines of your IA. It’s the organization of your website, how things are arranged, and it needs to make sense to your visitors.

Unfortunately, not enough businesses focus on their IA or they assume their customers use their site in the same way they would. This blog post explains why you must pay attention to your IA and includes some handy hints to figure out if it’s working.

I Can See Clearly Now

The non-profit Institute for Dynamic Educational Advancement (IDEA) recently released a study called Finding Information: Factors that improve online experiences. One of the main findings was that visitors are looking for “simple, accurate, fast, and easily navigable web sites.” Visitors to websites reported feeling lost on websites or not knowing where their desired information was in much higher percentages than the designers of the websites.

Your designers may have the best of intentions and be highly creative, but it’s up to you to ensure your customers can find the information they need and know where they are on your site at all times.

Website navigation starts with your IA. Here are some handy hints to help you determine whether your website is easily navigable and, if not, how to start fixing it.

Handy Hints

• Speak their language: In their free ebook, “Humanize it,” Leonardo Inghilleri and Micah Solomon recommend thinking about the language you use with your customers and, I would add, the language they use with you. “Identify terminology that best represents your brand position and identity and use it consistently.” This is a great way to get your customers to use a standard lexicon. In terms of IA though, don’t forget to use the language they use to find you and to navigate your site. Keyword research is a great starting point to figure out your customer’s language. Then use these keywords in your IA.
• Test it out: Janelle Barlow and Claus Moller recommend having your employees test out the site in their best-selling book, A Complaint is a Gift. “Once customers are at your Web site, make it easy for them to navigate. Ask every single employee to spend time at the company’s Web site and then take all their feedback and improve what customers are experiencing” (page 214).
• Keep an ear to the ground: Sometimes (most times) your customers don’t tell you that your IA stinks. Many don’t have the terminology to do so and some are so turned off that they don’t want to do business with you again. So listen to what they are saying about you elsewhere. Again, from A Complaint is a Gift: “Blogs are extremely important to monitor because they are opinionated conversations being conducted…It’s almost overwhelming, but monitoring helps” (page 208). Look for your business’ name along with phrases like “can’t find,” “where is,” and “confusing.”
• Value and implement customer feedback: If you are lucky enough to receive customer feedback on your IA, don’t let it go to waste. Bruce Temkin writes in his free ebook, “The 6 Laws of Customer Experience,” that “[i]nternal measurements may provide a sense of how the business operates, but they don’t give a true evaluation of customer experience…[which is companies should implement] letting customer input drive priorities, decisions, and investments.” As this applies to commerce, it also applies to your IA.

Focus on the goal: a seamless online experience for your website visitor. Allow them to find what they want quickly and not get lost. Once you simplify it to these basic tenants, you can then use Occam’s razor to strip away anything that hinders that goal.

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Share it on Twitter

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Readers of OnlineMarketerBlog sent a lot of traffic here in July. In fact, we more than doubled the pageviews of our previous best month.

And thanks goes to you. The blog only got this much traffic because you guys told your friends to subscribe, shared articles on Twitter and FriendFeed, linked to it from your own blogs, stumbled it, mixxed it, sphunn it, and just otherwise kicked @ss.

I will return to regular postings tomorrow, but today, I wanted to carve out a space to give you a very sincere thank you.

New Pages

You will notice two new tabs in the navigation.

• The “Best Of…” page is a collection of posts that this blog’s readers have most enjoyed. It is a great place to send newbies who want to know what this blog is all about, and a place for long-time readers to learn what the community has liked.
• The “Books You Need” page is a list of books mentioned on the blog. You may know that I read a lot and mention the best books here on the blog. I wanted to give you all a space to peruse and buy those books on Amazon.com. (This list will remain only books I recommend; negatively reviewed or mentioned books will not make the cut, so you can trust the list to be the best books in marketing and social media.)

I hope these pages are useful to you. And again, please accept my thanks for your faithful readership. I don’t take it for granted.

DJ

Courtesy of jbhill via Flickr

I’ve had a little case of writer’s block this week, so I started with the basics: I read the definition of “marketing” in Wikipedia.

The impetus of this was a comment I wrote on a recent Brazen Careerist article in which I boiled down marketing to selling stuff. Really? That’s the business I’m in? I get up at 5am to write because I love making crap fly off the shelves?

Listen to Wikipedia’s definition: “Essentially, marketing is the process of creating or directing an organization to be successful in selling a product or service that people not only desire, but are willing to buy.”

Bleh! Sure, there’s creation and desire (positive), but there is also directing and willingness to consume (negative). It’s almost like it’s not enough for them to buy it; you gotta make them want to buy it. Make ‘em beg.

Frankly, this doesn’t sound like the business I’m in at all. I find marketing these days to be customer based – where are they and what do they want? – and less, well, skeezy. Ideally, marketing these days isn’t invasive or worthless or annoying. In fact, marketing these days sounds a lot more like anthropology than marketing.

What do you think? Are web 2.0 marketers really anthropologists of the present time? Don’t we study why certain people behave a certain way (and how to influence that behavior)?

Maybe Not

Maybe I’m way off base. Maybe I’m an idealist. Is marketing these days really that different from the old days? Sure, maybe we have flashier toys and get better insights, but does this alone more it into the category of anthropology?

Maybe So

Here’s the difference: Now, relationships are a prerequisite to business, not vice versa.

You may want to read that last sentence again. Even if it’s not that way right now, all signs indicate we are moving in that direction.

But not just in a direct sense, business to customer. Now, blogs have as much or more influence as official channels (e.g. company websites, newspapers). And recommendations from friends have even more sway than blogs. (Sounds crazy? It’s not. Scope the numbers via Groundswell [page 132 for those of you following along at home].)

All the while, people who call themselves marketers are camped out in the bush, observing all of this new commerce occurring, jotting down furtive notes in our journals on our blogs.

What do you think? Is marketing now anthropology of the present day? Do we need to change the definition of marketing altogether? Or am I just full of it?

*

If you liked this post, feel free to show some love:

Subscribe to OnlineMarketerBlog.com via email or RSS

Stumble it

Sphinn it

Mixx it

Or share it on Twitter