The Grateful Life

A Few Thoughts on Role Playing for Salespeople

2014-04-11T14:01:00.000-04:00

Over the years, honing presentation skills has been a regular part of "getting the job done" in all the sales jobs I've had. At a certain point, the time comes to "role play"; a practice of giving your sales pitch to a pretend audience made up, usually, of co-workers.

This can cause anxiety and perspiration. There will even be those that feel aggravated that they have to go through this. But the bottom line is that if you're in sales, you need to know your product, your pitch, and feel comfortable speaking to a room full of people.

Most often, the bad sentiments associated with "role playing" come from the make-believe construct ("I know this isn't real. You know this isn't real. I know you know this isn't real. You know I know you know this isn't real. Who are we fooling?") and the relationships we have with co-workers ("My gaffs will be happy hour fodder", "You judgin' me, bro?").

But there are ways to mitigate these issues and get productive. The key is to make sure it doesn't come across as remedial or feel like a tribunal. How do you do that? Here are my thoughts...

- Call it "show n tell". This is less intimidating and not encumbered with preconceived notions of putting salespeople on trial and in front of hard-nosed prosecutors.

- By not calling it "role playing", you're not asking sales people to be someone other than themselves. Salespeople need to be themselves, feel comfortable in their own skin. Let them use their own words and style to convey the message. If it's scripted and memorized, it comes off sounding...wait for it...scripted and memorized.

- Have only one or two people play the prospect at a time. Everyone else is a silent observer. Too many prospects and it turns into a pile on.

- This isn't a game of "stump the chump". No one wins or learns when the prospect tries to trip up or agitate the sales presenter. (See bullet point below on addressing client objections).

- Break it down into its component parts. Presentation pitches have multiple parts (e.g. The opening, the intro, etc.). So, one idea is to have the salespeople break it down and just "show n tell" their opening or their product benefits.

- Open such a session with a white board exercise on the most common client objections and the best way to handle them. This positions the session as more than presentation skills and kicks things off as a team exercise.

- The first person to run through their pitch should be a sales manager, not one of the team members. If you can't step up, or don't know the pitch, you have no business running such an event.

- Don't have the role of the prospect played by the sales manager or a senior exec. The salesperson should not see this as a job performance review, but rather the training session that it is. Have a peer or person junior to the presenter act as the prospect.

- Video tape it. Yeah, this is awkward and often more unsettling to the presenter than the issues mentioned above. But it's incredibly enlightening (and eventually empowering) to see yourself in action. It also gives the team a chance to review in "slow mo" - step by step - what worked, and what didn't, without interrupting the flow of the live presentation.

- Don't make this a one-time big event. Pitches, narratives, and strategies change in response to products and markets evolving. Do it regularly and it will feel less like a final exam, and more like a team scrum.

Would love to hear what you think. Drop a comment below...

Does Federer Bring His Racket on Vacation?

2013-08-23T09:09:00.001-04:00

This post isn't about tennis ;-)

I've been on vacation for the last 2 weeks - it's been great to get away for an extended period of time. I'm not sure I've ever taken 2 weeks off. Definitely not in the last 10 years.

I've tried to balance staying off the grid and staying in touch. A few emails here and there, and work colleagues tell me to get back to vacationing. A little online time, and well, similar looks from the family.

But I bet that Roger Federer brings his racket on vacation, and no one complains or expects otherwise.

Vacation is about unwinding - and we've done plenty of that. But it's not about stress. And the build up of emails and action items is stressful to me. I don't want to return home to a load of inbox stress.

I have a feeling that Dave Matthews brings his guitar on vacation, and no one complains or expects otherwise.

As it is, I decided not to buy a local SIM chip (I'm in Canada). So, I'm only really online (WiFi) in the mornings and evenings...with a few intermittent spats online if we hit a WiFi zone.

I'd be surprised if Fred Wilson didn't blog while on vacation.

So, that's why I do a little work*, while on vacation.

*not really work if you love what you do.

Disqus - My New Gig

2012-07-08T20:07:00.000-04:00

Image via CrunchBase

I'm really excited that next week I'll be working for Disqus, the leading commenting platform on the web. My role will be Head of Publisher Development, based in NYC where the publisher-facing team is based.

About 6 months ago, Tynt, the company I've spent the last 2.5 years with, was acquired by 33Across. We built a great network of publishers at Tynt. And that network continues to grow under 33Across. I'm excited for the 33Across team because I think they are at the intersection of two compelling trends: social media and online advertising. I look forward to tracking their continued success.

The acquisition brought with it a lot of inbound interest from other start-ups wondering if I was available. But it wasn't until the last few weeks that I started to consider the many interesting opportunities out there.

I talked with some great early-stage companies that I think are on to some great ideas. But the team, the traction, the latest release, and strategy at Disqus really impressed me. And it helped that I was already an active user and have known some of the guys there for a few years.

Thank you Ro and Daniel for reaching out and giving me this opportunity. I can't wait to get started! Speaking of thanks...

Fred Wilson had a great blog post earlier today that compelled me to thank him for his support...and clue a few of that community's members into this news.

iPhone 4 Can Survive Being Run Over by NYC Taxi

2011-12-11T21:05:00.000-05:00

On November 21, 2011 I was exiting Grand Central Terminal and waiting to cross 42nd Street, when I looked down at the pavement. There I saw a pulverized iPhone:

Found this on 42nd St., literally. Obviously run over by a taxi. What shd I do with it? FYI, not mine. Won't power on. http://twitpic.com/7hfv1q
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) November21, 2011

As you can see, the glass wasn't just cracked - as frequently happens when an iPhone is dropped - but it was shattered. There were the tiniest of glass shards dropping from this device. I carefully picked it up and carried it by the metal band to my office. I figured I'd charge it up and see if I could identify the owner. It wouldn't charge. And then it occurred to me that I might be shorting out the circuitry because it was wet due to the rain from the night before.

So I wrapped it up and brought it home where I dried it out with the help of some desiccant we had in the basement. I left the iPhone in some Tupperware full of this stuff for a few days. I also ordered some tools and parts to see if I could replace the back glass, and the front (actually called the digitizer and LCD). Then on the next weekend, I took the iPhone apart:

iPhone 4 in pieces. This is the one I found shattered on 42nd St a few weeks ago. http://pic.twitter.com/LNVNv5mW
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

Getting all the glass and grime off it wasn't easy, but in the end, I succeeded and was surprised that most of the guts looked like they were intact.

By yesterday, all the spare parts had arrived and I was able to re-assemble the phone. YouTube is a great resource with many "how to" videos. I followed this one to disassemble and reassemble the iPhone:

And I was able to easily find the parts I needed through Amazon. $63 spent. Well worth the expense to geek out on a project like this.

Let's see if I can put it all back together again. New back and front glass for iPhone 4. http://pic.twitter.com/3Gg1tVbH
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

New face on the iPhone http://pic.twitter.com/04pLqDZe
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

Motherboard and speaker unit installed #iphone4 #geekrepair http://pic.twitter.com/nhEOUKyT
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

Motherboard wired up. Battery in. New glass back goes on next. #iphone #repair http://pic.twitter.com/u8nR0Dkn
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

After charging the iPhone for a little bit, I was able to get to the home screen (there was no screen lock passcode needed). From there, I opened a few apps like Twitter and picture gallery, and was pretty sure I had the owners name. To be sure, I opened up the email app and found a non-personal email to the owner from Amazon. Within the email, I clicked on the "to" field (obviously, the email was sent to the iPhone's owner) and found the owner's email address, full name, and telephone number. The telephone number was likely the number associated with this iPhone - or perhaps a new iPhone.

Hmm...good sign? Iphone is booting up and now charging. Geeks rejoice. #iphone4 #repair http://pic.twitter.com/xz8xUNBL
— Jim Hirshfield (@jimhirshfield) December10, 2011

I suspected that the owner had bought a new iPhone since it took me 3 weeks from finding the pulverized device until I got it repaired. So I called the number, and he picked up.

I confirmed it was him, introduced myself, and asked him if he had lost an iPhone. He had (duh!). I told him the whole story - he had no idea where he lost it, or the circumstances. So he was surprised and very interested in the details - even though he had a new iPhone. I think he was mostly relieved to know what happened and to come to closure.

I offered to meet him and hand it off. He thanked me and said I could keep it. Now I'm struggling with how to use an iPhone 4 as a glorified iPod Touch with a SIM chip that's obviously been marked as lost/stolen. Might have to jailbreak it.

By late this afternoon, I couldn't even get it to boot up. I'm starting to suspect that Apple or AT&T have disabled it. I might just have a $63 brick on my hands.

Paying for Bundled TV or Cord Cutting?

2011-11-09T09:11:00.001-05:00

Image by largeprime via Flickr

Ryan Lawler over at GigaOm has an interesting post up regarding pay TV services. The high-level point that he's emphasizing is that kids and younger adults are not paid subscribers to a Multichannel Video Programming Distributor (MVPD) - basically Cable TV, and the like. The post's headline declares, "The Children are our Future, and They're not Paying for TV" (link below under Related Articles).

When I read that, I immediately said to myself, there was no paid TV when I was a kid. My parents didn't pay for TV until some time in the 1980's. Paid TV is a relatively recent phenomenom.

The GigaOm blog post goes on to cover some interesting data points regarding the trend towards a la carte programming - or at least consumers' demands for a la carte programming. Who needs 500 stations (or wants to pay for them) when there are only a handful of shows that are of interest?

And that's the reason I've cut the cable TV cord. In our home we do pay for programming, but we get it through streaming services (like Netflix). I'm no young adult - I have two young children - but there's plenty of content to keep everyone entertained.

There's a strong trend towards unbundling of content programming. And it's happening whether or not the cable TV, satellite dish, or telephone companies want to participate. Just like the music business, kids will pay for the content if it's packaged and priced in an appealing manner.

My Way or the Highway

2011-10-07T10:04:00.001-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

There's been a lot written about Steve Jobs in the last few days. He was a remarkable man.

David Pogue's piece in the New York Times, among others, does a great job describing Steve Jobs' strengths, his creativity, his genius, his focus. We've also heard the stories that he was, at times, hard to work with.

I think the "hard to work with" sentiment is a direct symptom of working with someone that has a clear and confident vision and controls, if not demands, having the final say. There's an expression, "My way or the highway" - In other words, "We're going to do this my way, otherwise you can drive off into the sunset".

That doesn't make everyone happy. But running a business isn't about making everyone on the team happy or coming to some sort of compromise. After all, isn't "compromise" often a euphemism to describe a less-than-ideal outcome?

Too many boards, product, and management teams at start-ups are paralyzed because everyone's opted into management-by-committee. Five people; five different opinions.

I'm not sure who said it first, but I heard it first from my pal Scott Rafer: "Start-ups are not democracies."

If Everything is Shared Automatically, Nothing has Significance

2011-10-01T22:52:00.000-04:00

Image by SHAREconference via Flickr

I often struggle with how much to share on this blog, on LinkedIn, on Twitter, on Facebook, and on other social media platforms that I participate on. There are so many factors that come into play, such as the audience on each platform (some are more business focused; others more personal), the "who cares" factor, TMI (too much information), and other influences. In the end, "over-sharing" has become one of the problems with social media. It's no longer social or helpful if it's overwhelming.

I've felt this way for a while now, but couldn't really articulate it well until I read a great piece by Jeff Sonderman of the Poynter Institute. In his post regarding "frictionless sharing", he brings it all home with this:

The fact that people choose to keep most things private places significance on what they choose to share. If everything is shared automatically, nothing has significance.

“Sharing without intention is not social, it’s overwhelming, it’s noise,” social media consultant Jeff Gibbard observes on his blog. “Not everything I read, I endorse. Not everything I watch, I like. Not everything I listen to, I want to share. Without intention it’s simply surveillance.”

Their target here are services that automatically broadcast what you read or the music you listen to. I believe my settings in the music service Spotify are set to broadcast every song I listen to into my Facebook stream. So far, none of my friends have complained about that - but I suspect it's overkill.

Sonderman brings up a great point that news publications have to be careful how they deploy these broadcast tools. They could end up alienating their readers if their readers' friends feel overwhelmed.

Let me know in the comments what you think and how you balance sharing versus over-sharing.

Real Names, Pseudonymity, and Anonymity

2011-08-02T09:46:00.000-04:00

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

In the last week or so there's been a lively debate a'brewin' about identity online. Facebook is opposed to people using anything other than their real names - primarily, it would seem, to combat cyber bullying. Google followed suit when they launched their Google Plus service - but they took a lot of heat for not letting people use pseudonyms (nicknames).

Mathew Ingram at GigaOm has a good post on Google's position on real names.

Fred Wilson has staked his position. As has the Electronic Frontier Foundation. There's more coverage on this listed below under "Related articles".

I don't think there's one answer that suits the internet as a whole. There are cases where anonymity is needed (e.g. political discourse in repressive countries). And I do (mostly) agree that real names clean up most of the bullying, nasty, and spammy comments online. But it doesn't prevent all bad behavior.

One part of this debate that some folks might be missing is that pseudonymity is not the same as anonymity. Using a nickname to create a different persona online is a fun and expressive way to participate in social media (sharing, blogging, twittering, etc). But it's not the same as anonymity.

I choose to use my real name in most places online. Many of my friends use pseudonyms (but I still know who they are; they're not trying to hide their true identity). Bottom line: I think it's a personal choice.

Privacy is About Expectations More Than Anything Else

2011-07-13T09:53:00.000-04:00

Image by ShashiBellamkonda via Flickr

Chris Kelley

I attended SecondMarket's "Cocktails & Conversations" event last night. The guest speaker was Chris Kelly, formerly the Chief Privacy Officer at Facebook. His talk was titled "The Evolution of Social Privacy" - as you can imagine a very timely and relevant presentation given privacy breaches and blunders at companies such as Apple (geo-tracking iphone and ipad users), Sony (Playstation Network debacle), and increasing regulatory action in this area.

The thing that really stuck with me is that privacy, like many things, is so critically dependent on expectations. Chris pointed out - (obvious once you hear it) - if you are transparent upfront about what you are going to do with user data, then users will be OK with that. (The ones that aren't OK with it, well they can make an informed decision to not participate; no one gets misled). The point is that if you set someone's expectations that certain online behavior (sharing photos online, "friending" other people, posting a video, tracking click behavior, targeting ads, etc) will be used in certain ways or publicly shared, then users will generally be OK with that. Don't surprise them.

It's when online services are opaque about these things that they get in trouble. So, set expectations upfront by informing users what data of theirs or about them is collected and how it will be used.

As Chris said, if you're not upfront and transparent with your users, then you probably have something to hide. I'll add that it can make you appear evil if it's intentional, or otherwise apathetic and ambivalent about a very sensitive issue.

BioDigital Human - Browser Power

2011-07-12T10:10:00.000-04:00

Source: BioDigitalHuman.com

At last week's NY Tech Meetup, one of the companies presenting was BioDigital Human. It's a collaboration of medical and computer science that is very impressive. And it's a sign of things to come.

The astonishing thing is the 3D rendering of the human body from the skeleton on out to the skin - viewable in whole, in layers, in cross-section, in dissection, and from any angle. The level of detail and utility is so much more impressive when you realize this is all done in the browser - no plug-ins, no downloads, nothing to install. (Firefox only, for now).

The applicability and implications go beyond science, medicine, and education of human anatomy. This type of utility delivered through a browser will do amazing things to advance other areas such as architecture, gaming, manufacturing, finance, and more. Certainly there are desktop applications that these industries use for visualization, but it's the power of browser ubiquity that will make rich information more accessible and engaging to more people.

If you don't have Firefox, or would rather just sit back and watch the awesomeness, check out the video of their presentation and advance to timestamp 01:17:00.

NY Tech Meetup's After-Party Hits the Mark

2011-07-07T09:25:00.001-04:00

"Longtimers" by @innonate

Tuesday night's NY Tech Meetup was awesome in so many ways. Interesting and innovative companies presented, high-tech magic was performed, and it all wrapped up with break dancers.

I'm a regular at this monthly meetup of 800+ folks interested in the NY tech scene. It's the largest and oldest Meetup with a community of 18,000 members. I go to see new tech and the people behind that tech. I also go to see old friends and acquaintances in the tech community. But I've always found it frustrating because it's difficult to network at these events.

That's because - by virtue of the size of the audience - the events are held in a theater. Obviously, you can't mingle too easily within a theater. So I was thrilled when the after-party was held within the same venue as the main event in an open meeting hall at the NYU Skirball Center. Usually the after-party is in a local bar where tons of people crowd in and you can't have a conversation over the loud music.

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I'm not the only one. Many people at the event the other night were praising the new arrangement. I hope they continue it because I caught up with some friends and met some new and interesting entrepreneurs. And that's what community is all about.

They've Been Tracking You for Years...Offline. Is Online Tracking Over-Hyped?

2011-07-05T10:55:00.000-04:00

Image by ancawonka via Flickr

After writing a post last week about Interactivity & Privacy, I got to thinking about all the ways that we've been tracked offline for years. Here's my list (so far):

Supermarket - Discount & loyalty cards allow them to track what I buy, and infer if I have children (diaper purchases!), income level (do I buy the expensive brand or generic), how much beer I consume (let's not go there).
Other stores/malls - Images of me, in addition to similar data as above.
Hotels - Through cardkey systems they know when I come and go.
Credit Cards - What I buy, where I buy, where I geographically am, and a bevy of inferred data from purchases I make as in supermarket example, but much broader.
Bank - Income (direct deposit), debt, homeownership, purchase behavior, timeliness of bill paying.
Cable TV Company - What I watch, how much I watch, when I watch.
Landline Telephone Company - Who, when, and duration of calls, who I call most frequently.
Mobile Telephone Company - Same as landline plus where I am geographically located currently, and where I've been. Content of my text messages.
Home Security (Alarm) Company - When I'm home/away.
Automotive Servicer - How frequently I exceed the speed limit.
EZ Pass (highway toll payments) - Where I am, where I've been.

So, it occurs to me that this data far exceeds the amount of data collected about me online. I'm not concerned about privacy to the degree that certain media coverage would have me freaking out. I've had no bad experiences with the above establishments tracking to-date. That said, I'm still a little at ease that many auto-flush public toilets have the ability to track my frequency and duration of use. Thank goodness this data is anonymized and aggregated - just kidding!

Good VCs Have Always Had Good Ideas

2011-07-01T08:48:00.000-04:00

Image by *r.s* Photography * via Flickr

There was a nice article yesterday in the New York Observer by Adrianne Jeffries titled "Steal This Start-Up! No Longer Content to Write Checks, VCs Are Giving Away Their Best Ideas".

The premise is that there's a new trend: venture capitalists are pitching entrepreneurs on ideas, instead of the other way around. I'm glad to see Jeffries call attention to this, but the thing is, I don't think it's anything new or surprising. Good VCs have always shared and pitched their ideas, especially to A-list entrepreneurs pitching them ideas with good "bones". Early-stage investors are not just silent financial backers; they're value-add collaborators. Part of that value-add is helping entrepreneurs tweak their business models, and to the extreme, helping them pivot (i.e. make a wholesale change in their business model).

Why are early-stage investors good at this? They see tons of "deal flow". So, it's no surprise that they have great ideas - their minds are constantly chewing on the aggregation of innovators' pitches.

As a matter of fact, if the VCs you're speaking with have no good ideas, that might be a cause for concern; they're either not the right VC, or your idea is uninspiring.

Interactivity and Privacy

2011-06-30T14:54:00.000-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

I'm often surprised by people's reaction to privacy issues online. It's as if they've forgotten that the Internet is an interactive medium. As we browse the web, it is not analogous to window shopping, watching the tube, or flipping through a magazine in a dentist's office. Every website visit is a visit onto someone else's property.

The interactive nature of this medium means that there's a two-way channel of communication between the user and the website they're visiting. I see them; they see me.

When I enter a brick and mortar store, I expect that my every move is video-taped and that the purchases I make are tracked by my credit card company and the store. When I enter the store - as opposed to just window shopping - the expectation and reality change with regard to privacy and propriety. I've moved from a one-way relationship to an interactive relationship once I've entered the store.

I view the Internet in a similar fashion. I'm not surprised that Amazon tracks the products I browse or that an online publisher knows which articles I have read...and then some.

The goal is to make it a better experience - an interactive experience - a more personal experience. Certainly the line can be crossed and privacy violated. But I'm optimistic that the tracking that's currently going on is, by and far, done in good will for the betterment of the medium.

Interactivity changes privacy expectations online, as it generally does offline.

"Talent Acquisition" - aka Employment Audition

2010-12-22T11:04:00.000-05:00

Image via CrunchBase

Owen Thomas at VentureBeat has an interesting take on Twitter's acquisition of Fluther, which has been referred to as a "talent acquisition." We've seen a few of these recently, as Owen points out. Kudos to him for calling out Twitter on this: In no uncertain terms, this is simply Twitter hiring smart people. Nothing wrong with that at all. His point is, companies acquire assets or they hire people; no such thing as a "talent acquisition" in M&A practice.

I wouldn't proclaim Fluther a failed start-up. I had never heard of Fluther before yesterday. And I'm sure most people had not. And I don't expect to see it's use explode. It will, supposedly, live on as a standalone service. Is it a failure? I guess that depends on how you view it.

As an "employment audition" it is highly successful, having captured the attention of Twitter and secured these guys great jobs. That's a big success in my mind.

About.me and the "Spawning of Features"

2010-12-21T09:42:00.003-05:00

Image via WikipediaAol announced yesterday that they acquired the recently launched service called About.me. There's been some discussion about why a brand new service was sold four days after they launched, and what unique proposition they offered. If you haven't heard, About.me is a simple-to-setup "calling card" webpage. Here's mine: Jim's About.me page.

There are two things that captured my imagination about this service. The first is, why them? There are many other sites that have been doing this for a long time. Flavors.me comes to mind, but so do services from the "big boys". Check out Google Profiles and Yahoo Pulse - they're giving these services serious attention in an effort to capture the "identity space" that Facebook and LinkedIn have done such a good job with.

I suppose Aol wanted to provide a simple to use service (I have to admit, the user experience on About.me is clean and simple - a big plus), at an easy to remember domain...in an effort to stay competitive with Facebook, Google, and Yahoo, among others. If Facebook has proven anything, it's that "identity" on the web is important to growth.

The other thing that captured my attention about this service - more so than all the other discussed and debated points - is the "spawning of features" effect. What do I mean by that? If you view Facebook as a collection of features, services, and applications, it can be overwhelming. Certainly it's not a user experience to be admired (aside: this point validated by the recent appointment at Facebook of Paul Adams, previously Google Researcher that critiqued Facebook's user experience). So, I see a trend where companies are launched based solely on one simple feature that was previously part of Facebook.

A service like About.me is just a simplified, standalone version, of your Facebook profile, with a dash of design elegance and a dose clean UI/UX. It doesn't stop there. Don't forget Twitter. It is, in it's genesis, a standalone version of Facebook's status update. Ditto for Path, the latest buzzed about photo sharing service. What else?

It's interesting to speculate what might come next. But it's equally perplexing when you consider that many critiques of new start-ups brush them aside as mere features, not companies.

Cater to a Niche

2010-12-09T09:02:00.000-05:00

A guy I know in the NY Tech scene asked me for advice on his new application and the market for it. It occurred to me that he's built a great utility that could be used for many different purposes. You might say he's built a platform in a particular category that makes it easy for just about anyone to launch a service in this medium.

He hasn't given me the go ahead to mention his company...that's why I'm being opaque.

Point is: Being a platform (think: Twitter, Blogger, YouTube) is a formidable goal, however, it's hard to accomplish and doesn't succeed as often as niche plays. The target market needs to understand what they can do with the service. Remember, people don't want tools; they want what the tools can do for them. (Reminds me of the expression: People don't want drills, they want the hole it makes.) Defining the target market for people makes it easier for them to understand the fit. For instance, don't just say it's a communications platform; tell us that it's an innovative way for teachers to communicate with student. Cater to a niche.

Finding the niche market and succeeding in it is easier. And if need be, the same underlying technology can be applied to other niches later.

It reminds me of the expression, "Jack of all trades, master of none." When you're trying to solve a problem, you want an expert, not a generalist. The same holds true for products (IOW, people want the right tool for the job).

Attention, That's the Point

2010-12-08T08:55:00.000-05:00

Image via WikipediaQuite often the pitch you get or the pitch you receive asks for your time. "Could you spare 30 minutes to meet with me to discuss...", or "I just need 5 minutes of your time to show you the value of our service".

But it isn't time. It's attention.

In this age of distraction and "multi-tasking" (a misnomer, but that's another post) it's not easy getting someone's attention. But the point is, it doesn't matter how much time you have been granted. Make sure you get their attention and use that attention wisely to make your point.

For instance, don't write a long email describing your product if your intent is to get a meeting. A long email is a "homework assignment", and no one likes homework. Keep the email brief, grab their attention with a genuine statement, and ask for the meeting. Once you have the meeting (and their attention), then you can tell them more.

Realize that when most people say they're too busy to meet with you or they're too busy to advance your project, it's not because of a shortage of time. It's that there are too many things that demand their attention - and the perceived benefit you're presenting does not justify attention.

So, if you're not getting attention, fix the perception (are you not articulating it effectively?) or fix the benefit (does your product need improvement?).

Thanks for your attention.

The Many Versions of the "Free" Business Model

2009-10-10T09:35:00.000-04:00

There's been a lot of buzz of late regarding the use of "free" in business models. With Chris Anderson's recent book Free, and the ever popular "Freemium" model among internet marketers. And let's not forgot the troubles that many publishers are having reconciling their decisions to offer their content for free online. What I've witnessed is a lack of distinction between different uses of free in business models, and some folks jumping to the conclusion that just because there's a free offering, that it must be some new phenomenon.

Don't get me wrong, the Freemium model is a very valid and compelling model in my opinion. I'm just pointing out that not all models that incorporate free are Freemium. Here are a couple of examples...

Free, like a Metro newspaper
No surprise, free newspapers that you can pickup in the subway or around town are advertising supported. The "money flow" in the business (advertisers paying publishers) is disconnected from the customer base (the readers). More readers does indeed boost advertising revenue, but there's no effort in this model to extract cash from readers.

Free, like Twitter
Many internet companies offer free services, such as Twitter and Facebook. In addition to advertising (like the example above) these companies are looking to leverage their audiences by charging businesses for use or exposure to that audience. Again, the customer base is not being asked to pony up cash. (and this isn't to say that these guys won't go the Freemium route later, or that they have no business model).

Free, as in Freemium
Free in this model is used as a "tasting" that leads to a portion of the userbase upgrading to the premium version. This is one way that LinkedIn makes money. They offer a great service that needs lots of users to sign-up in order for their model to work (which is another reason to offer a free service - their model wouldn't be too useful if there was no one in your professional network) and a portion of the users pay for their premium offering.

So, if you're thinking about applying a marketer's favorite word ("Free") to your business model, make sure you have a clear understanding of the different versions and implications of free business models.

Pair Programming: An Interesting Model

2009-09-21T09:41:00.000-04:00

Image by lumaxart via Flickr

I read an article by the NY Times Online this past weekend and it really resonated with me. It's all about "pair programming" where two software developers work side-by-side, one as the "driver" and the other as the "navigator". Here's how the author defined it:

One person does the actual writing, or coding, and the other person checks it, corrects it and offers suggestions as it's being written. Programmers, or software developers, refer to these roles as driver and navigator.

At first, as the author points out, it would seem that this is two people doing the job of one person - and thereby an inefficient use of human resources. But as it turns out the end product is of such a higher quality that less resources are spent later in fixing bugs and such.

And it got me thinking that there are a lot of disciplines within business that could benefit from this concept. Quite often we work on our own to "develop" business plans, sales strategies, marketing objectives, or product roadmaps. So, pair programming is just the implementation of the collective intelligence (a.k.a., "two heads are better than one") making these end products better.

But this shouldn't be taken to the extreme, otherwise you end up with "death by committee". That would be taking collaboration too far because too many voices restrict the flow of innovation unless strict discipline is enforced. I think creative juices flow better when there are just a few people involved at a time and they recognize that it's an evolving discourse; you don't need to have all the answers going into it.

You also don't look so foolish when you're thinking out loud if there's someone else in the room with you. :-p

How I Use Twitter

2009-09-17T11:43:00.004-04:00

Image via CrunchBase

I follow interesting people and not so interesting people (some of my friends :-p ) on Twitter. I won't get into a whole explanation of what Twitter is over here. If you don't know, get a quick education on their site and at oh, about a million other places on the web.

People use a lot of different third-party applications, on their desktops and on their handheld devices to participate in Twitter. I've tried a bunch, and this isn't intended to be a review of any of them, but more so a peek into how I use Twitter.

Shocking as it may be to some of my geeky friends, I actually use SMS on my BlackBerry to follow the most interesting Twitter conversationalists and friends. It's just a handful of people and brands that I follow in this manner. However SMS is probably by far the most common way that I post tweets to Twitter.

I have TwitterBerry and TweetCaster on my BlackBerry, and use them mostly to pick up @messages. Still not sure which one I like better. The later is more feature rich, but the former is more responsive as an app.

I've stayed away from the third-party apps on the desktop because I know they would immediately consume more of my time than I'd like. So I check in once in a while, taking a sip from the hose, on the Twitter website itself.

Now, that's mostly the mechanics of how I use Twitter. I actually use it to hear about interesting news from the people that I follow and click-through to the interesting things they've written and discovered on the web.

I use it to discover interesting articles linked to by the people I follow. And as a way to easily communicate with friends and colleagues.

To me, the most powerful aspect of Twitter is the professional implications - and maybe that's why their recent valuation was at $1B - money in them thar hills. I use it to find professionals that I need to reach for my job. LinkedIn is a powerful tool for finding WHO the people are at a particular company, but you can't easily communicate with them on LinkedIn (unless you pony up the cash for their premium account). On Twitter, you can communicate with them - albeit in public - but it's just a conversation opener.

Chasing Your Competiton = Suicide

2009-09-16T10:49:00.000-04:00

Image by Got Jenna via Flickr

It's widely accepted that you should never say that you have no competitors when giving a presentation to investors or business professionals. The theory goes that if you're the only one who has thought of this idea, or similar ideas, then it's probably not a good idea. Some form of competition validates what you're doing.

But that doesn't mean that you should spend too much time focused on what these competitors are doing. I think you should be aware of what they're doing, but never let their actions and features inappropriately drive your strategy. If you do, you're just a copycat - a follower instead of a leader.

And chances are you're not doing or planning the same exact product or feature-set as these "competitors". You must be doing something unique and innovative, otherwise where's the value in what you offer? So, you'll want to do it differently than your competitors IF you want to do it better. Reminds me of this quote (attribution unknown):

"Different isn't always better, but better is always different."

And if you're doing is differently (and hopefully better), then you should not be copying your competitor. That's just lazy and closed-minded.

Irritate, Innovate, and Iterate

2009-09-12T22:19:00.000-04:00

Image by andercismo via Flickr

I recently said this to someone in regard to product design, and I'm not sure if it's original or not. But it hit the spot:

You don't have to pay attention to the details, just don't be surprised when your competitor does.

I think it's really important to nit pick - to find things that could be improved upon, even if only marginally. Doesn't every little bit count? Focusing on little things may sound trivial, but little changes (especially in the copy text and UI of software used by thousands or millions of users) can make a big difference.

And what does it say about your company if your product clearly shows a lack of focus on the details? Don't get me wrong, sometimes we only have the resources available to address the "big issues" and focusing on the little one's is irritating. But innovation doesn't always involve big ideas and big plans.

The Personal Advisory Board

2009-05-29T09:15:00.009-04:00

Jeremiah Owyang tweeted this earlier today, and it got me thinking......the premise here is that the individual gets advice and the adviser gets something in return - what Jeremiah calls the "equity". This is analogous to the corporate advisory board where advisers receive equity or options in a company in exchange for their advice. So, what is this value that the personal adviser receives?

First, I think we need to look at the value that the individual setting up a personal advisory board gets.

What I've found to be the most powerful force in the personal advisory board structure is accountability. It's an interesting phenomenon, that the individual who creates a personal advisory board gains more from just having someone (or a team of people) to "report to" than from the advice they might receive. It's like that old adage about writing down your goals. If you don't write them down, you're less likely to achieve them. The same is true here.

By just having a "personal advisory board", you will achieve what you set out to accomplish more times than not.

That's because you will be more realistic about what you can achieve when you have to say it out loud to those that you respect. Additionally, you're more likely to succeed at your goals when you know that failure means having to justify to others why you failed. Self-justification is easy. Facing up to others is hard.

Image by lunaweb via Flickr

And so the "equity" for the adviser is really just the satisfaction of seeing a friend or a respected colleague succeed. It doesn't require a lot of time and resources to be a "personal (accountability) adviser"; you just have to "be there" for them - a listening ear. And to me this means that the kind of personal adviser that one should seek out should be someone they have a good relationship with - because these are the people that want to help. And they're the ones that gain value (aka equity appreciation) in helping others.

On a related note, I find that many of the "social tools" that we use online are an extension of this accountability factor. Your "social graph" is in many ways your personal advisory board.

Imagine how accountable you would feel if you tweeted your goals. That's the power of "social media". Give it a try. Tweet your #goals. Your advisory board is listening.

One of my Favorite Non-Profits: PCRM

2009-05-07T15:54:00.010-04:00

Image by breezeDebris via Flickr

I'm really excited about Zemanta's new campaign to raise awareness and funds for the non-profits that bloggers care about the most. Corporate sponsors have provided the cash, and Zemanta is giving the money away to the non-profits that are blogged about the most over the next few weeks.

Details are here: Blogging For A Cause, by Zemanta

And so, I thought I'd put in a plug for one of my favorite non-profits, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. They publish the handy Vegetarian Starter Kit pictured at the right. Putting 2 + 2 together, you're probably not surprised to hear that they're medical doctors that advocate a vegetarian diet. I think the science is very compelling. Here's a brief description of them:

Founded in 1985, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) is a nonprofit organization that promotes preventive medicine, conducts clinical research, and encourages higher standards for ethics and effectiveness in research.

Please do your part by blogging about your favorite non-profits. It only takes a minute, but the great feelings last a good long time.

This blog post is part of Zemanta's "Blogging For a Cause" campaign to raise awareness and funds for worthy causes that bloggers care about.

The Grateful Life

A Few Thoughts on Role Playing for Salespeople

Does Federer Bring His Racket on Vacation?

Disqus - My New Gig

Related articles

iPhone 4 Can Survive Being Run Over by NYC Taxi

Related articles

Paying for Bundled TV or Cord Cutting?

Related articles

My Way or the Highway

Related articles

If Everything is Shared Automatically, Nothing has Significance

Related articles

Real Names, Pseudonymity, and Anonymity

Related articles

Privacy is About Expectations More Than Anything Else

Related articles

BioDigital Human - Browser Power

Related articles

NY Tech Meetup's After-Party Hits the Mark

Related articles

They've Been Tracking You for Years...Offline. Is Online Tracking Over-Hyped?

Related articles

Good VCs Have Always Had Good Ideas

Related articles

Interactivity and Privacy

Related articles

"Talent Acquisition" - aka Employment Audition

Related articles that I hand-selected with Zemanta's help:

About.me and the "Spawning of Features"

Related articles I hand selected with the help of Zemanta:

Cater to a Niche

Attention, That's the Point

Related Articles I Chose With Zemanta's Help...

The Many Versions of the "Free" Business Model

Pair Programming: An Interesting Model

How I Use Twitter

Chasing Your Competiton = Suicide

Irritate, Innovate, and Iterate

The Personal Advisory Board

One of my Favorite Non-Profits: PCRM