The most successful process challenges are sourced from measured results. If the results aren’t what we expect then the process is open for modification in an effort to change the results to be more favorable.  That concept seems so simple, but in reality it can be very difficult to execute.

I think the problem is that challenging an existing process or the assumptions that made the process is a bit like challenging the status quo. In many business environments challenging the status quo is akin to “rocking the boat”. It’s considered risky. It could impact baseline business metrics, people, and even the cash flow of the business. Big companies grow to be risk averse and create processes and procedures to minimize risk.

“Named must your fear be before banish it you can.”
Yoda was right. Before we can remove a fear in our life, we must call it by name. Marketing technologists (or really any person in position to challenge assumptions), must be ready to change assumptions, processes, and business model when they have data and results to support the challenge. An essential goal of the technologist is to understand how to deliver better business results for stakeholders by understanding how technology can provide solutions.

The technologist drives new work and solutions within an organization as a result of their everyday actions. The technologist sees patterns and variables in data that may not have previously existed. The technologist finds reasons that customers can’t complete the desired action and proposes ways to remove the barrier(s). The technologist identifies ways to make processes more efficient, regardless of the people involved with the existing process.

“Do or do not. There is no try.”

Three examples from my story.
I find myself with opportunities to challenge existing models each week at work. I’m not always successful in changing the model. Sometimes its because my idea was wrong. Sometimes it’s because others don’t agree with my opinion. Sometimes it’s because others are too busy to listen. But there are times when my challenge succeeds in making a better way. Here are three quick personal examples of challenging the status quo:

1. In a B2B business model that does not sell direct to consumer the team thought they shouldn’t use sponsored search adwords because that would be considered “direct”. But what if we purchased ad space and sent the consumer to our existing site which honors the B2B contract with the client? It worked and the team found discovered a little about the click-through-rate of branded keywords in search results.
2. Customer address changes are a touchy topic when you are selling a financial instrument because it can increase the likelihood of fraud. But address changes are part of life. So why not emulate the process followed at bank or credit union when their account holders need to update their address? It worked for my team and provided the single largest increase in customer conversion rates for any software release the team had ever released.
3. In the early days of the internet I became the product manager for a web site where a customer order resulted in a notification to the call center. The call center would print the notification and then rekey the customer data into the order system. This print-to-key process was ripe for a more efficient method. So I suggested it and a few months later we integrated the web site to the ordering system. Bye-bye paper process.

Are you changing the model?
In the spirit of continuous improvement we all need to look for ways to challenge the processes that govern us. Adjust, measure, and react. I’m not talking about creating change just because some process is old. I’m also not talking about using technology for the sake of technology. I’m talking about using the tools of a technologist to understand how the purpose of the business process and how technology can make it better.

What say you?

Related posts:

1. Are you crazy enough to create change?
2. Internet Marketing, eCommerce Marketing, and the 4Ps

The classic answers.
- It’s a chance to network and find out what others are doing in my industry.
- It’s a chance to listen to speakers talk about how they have solved problems we all face.
- It’s a chance to find leads and prospective clients.
- It’s a chance to find new ideas to help us solve problems.

Well maybe. My experience is that groups of people from the same organization tend to hang-out with each other and not network all that much. As I look around a room when speakers are talking, I see a large percentage of people checking email from work and not really listening to the speaker.  As with most everything we do in life, we get out of it what we put into it.

There are different conference formats.
If you have never attended a BarCamp you should so that you can compare different conference styles. I have twice attended Product Camp Atlanta for product managers and marketers. These conferences are less structured, often with participants voting on the topics to be discussed. Participants are encouraged to become part of the presentations in a knowledge-share and discussion format. Sales pitches are discouraged and can be “booed” by participants.

Now I’m not promoting BarCamps over the traditional trade show conferences. I’m just pointing out various styles. Whether the conference is full of vendor booths, speaker sessions, or collaborative learning groups, we still get out of it what we put into it.

Digital Summit had a few recurring themes.
If I had to summarize all of the presentations I heard at Digital Summit this year it would be: Use data to measure how people are interacting with your brand so that you can influence them take some action (purchase, share, converse).

Nothing earth shattering with that statement. It covers some the basics of marketing. But as you would expect at a digital marketing conference, there was heavy emphasis on analytics, advertising, mobile, social, and search. I found some speakers engaging and others not so much.

A few specific thoughts that I think are worth repeating include:

• Michael Loban of InfoTrust saying that “what gets measured get’s done”. Loban talked about data existing in context. Marketers should understand the data in context and find what is actionable.
• In a talk about mobile development Jim Zimmerman of Thuzi discussed the importance of navigation in mobile design. It should be simple and clutter free. Consumers won’t navigate burdensome sites on a mobile device.
• Tony Haile of Chartbeat gave a unique presentation because he didn’t use any slides. He made the content of his speech engaging and relevant. One key thought from Haile was that real-time data is useless unless you setup your organization to respond quickly to events. The idea of the adaptive business is to create fast tactical responses to achieve better results. He used Toyota and the US Marines as examples of this concept.

It’s our professional game.
At the end of the day, conferences are about making connections with people in our professional game. Just like a professional athlete works to sharpen their skills, a professional knowledge worker must do the same.

I’ve coached youth athletics for almost ten years and one thing that is a must for any coach wanting to stay on top of his game, is networking with other coaches to trade knowledge. It usually involves exchanging ideas on different drills to run for certain skills.  That’s the same concept as sharing information at a conference. Fresh ideas and new insights.

So what are really learning at conferences? We’re learning to stay connected with people. We’re learning to share knowledge. We’re sharpening our skills because the next time we play our professional game we want to score more.

So let’s score more. In fact, in your professional game you can run-up the score. If you were at Digital Summit 2012 or have other thoughts on professional conferences I’d like to hear from you.

Related posts:

1. 2 examples of business learning maturation in our culture
2. 2 lessons learned in my career and I’m not done learning

But sales channels are a marketer mindset. Consumers don’t think about channels when they are going about their daily routine ( and that’s a good thing for consumers). It allows consumers to be educated on not only the product they are purchasing, but the company who is selling the product as well. My experience is that in many cases the price of the product is roughly the same. But things like return policy, customer service, convenience of locations, or shipping fees could provide the greatest distinction between choices.

For retailers running a business all these touch points create a set of business questions. Which channel(s) receive credit for the sale? Which channel(s) should be allocated the most budget spend? How many channels did the customer touch before making their purchase? And so on and so on…..

Enter channel attribution to help marketers.
Internet analytics providers are starting to implement features for channel attribution.  I received a monthly product update email from Google that contained a link to their channel attribute support for Google Analytics premium customers and about four months ago I discussed the same features in the Adobe SiteCatalyst platform with some colleagues.

Marketers love attribution because it helps them understand how their efforts affect the entire sales cycle. This enables better decisioning for budgets, channels, promotions, and features.  What this means in practical terms is that all interactions with a customer are tracked for measurement. So for example interactions with email click-throughs, search keywords, promotional offers, etc. The big idea is to correlate all these interactions at the end of a sale instead of just looking at the individual purchase funnel of the last transaction.

Look for a set of niche channel attribution consultants.
Let’s be real though, channel attribution is a complex topic. It requires a significant understanding of how customers interact with channels and a great deal of planning to setup. Once it’s implemented the analysis of the data isn’t trivial either.

This will become a consultants paradise over the next few years. The capability will be closer to companies now that major players in the internet analytics industry are adding the feature to their tools. But the amount of planning required, the expertise to configure the tool, and the ability to interpret the information will be a barrier to entry for many organizations. They’ll need consultants.

This is making us all better.
The gradual changes will be good. Business departments at Universities and Colleges will begin to teach more about how channels coexist, not how they operate in silos. Some industry players now teach that the concept of a channel is outdated. They see customer interactions in touch-points. Businesses will begin to make smarter adjustments to budgets and technology use. Marketers will make smarter decisions for 1:1 marketing tactics with consumers.

This is the perfect area for marketing technologists to fit within an organizational framework. The technologists have a role in system architecture, planning, implementation, as well as operational support for measurement and analysis. It’s a wake-up call for organizations that marketing is becoming more dependent on technology and that technology is only useful if it’s helping marketing bring business to the organization.

Are you thinking about channel attribution in your marketing and technology plans?

Related posts:

1. A multi-channel approach for customer communications and profiles
2. Where do you find world class customer focus?
3. Takeaways from eTail West Day 2

1. 6 ways to Increase Prices on Your ECommerce Site by Gagan Mehra of Practical eCommerce.  Pricing of products to maximize profits is an important topic and can lead to complex financial analysis. In this post, Mehra does a good job of reviewing some practical tips and ideas that could help eCommerce operators increase their average cart values.
2. Is the Digital Wallet Going Analog? by Demitri Kalogeropoulos of the Motley Fool. Lots of companies are trying mobile payment solutions in the market. But what caught my eye in this article was the mention of Hope Depot having an option for PayPal payments at the point of sale in their stores. The customer doesn’t need a phone or plastic. They simply use the touch screen with their PayPal credentials to complete the purchase.  Could the future of payments not involve mobile devices?
3. Wal-Mart to Offer Cash Option for Online Purchases by Christina Cheddar Berk of CNBC. Wal-Mart is trying a pay with cash option for online customers. If the customer elects to pay with cash then they have 48 hours to complete their purchase at a store location. They then choose if they want the merchandise shipped to the store or to their home. What this means is that the store cash registers must be able to pull information about the online purchase. Nifty integration. But will this be a hit with consumers? Seems to me like it eliminates the convenience of ordering online.

Let me know what links you shared, tagged, or commented on this week.

Related posts:

1. Thought readings 1
2. Thought readings 4
3. Thought readings 7

I don’t like clutter in my car. So after a family trip, a penny in my cup holder stood out along with a straw wrapper. Kelly’s milkshake.

I did not recognize the tail-side design. The familiar Lincoln memorial had been replaced by a thirteen stripe shield bearing “E Pluribus Unum.” Out of many, one.

I missed the change. (Get it?)

I think I missed the change (circa 2010) because I have gotten away from change. The two places where I used change most were the office lunch room cafeteria and the office vending machines. The former takes cash and checks, so to quit accumulating change, I went to checks using a secondary free checking account from Ally. Checks have gotten very efficient to process, getting converted quickly from paper to digital. Family checks are now deposited at the kitchen table using an iPhone or iPad. However, I doubt Ally is making much off my lunch money.

The second place I used change was our office vending machines. A little over a year ago, our vending machines got cellular antennas and magnetic / RFID card readers. The prices went up to fund the change, so my number of transactions went down, but I’ve been tapping my Amex smart chip ever since. No change.

These checks and these RFID card readers cost merchants money. There has been resistance in the U.S. to install new RFID equipment when “swiping” plastic works fine. What problem does tapping really solve? I think it solves the problem of card reader salesmen quotas.

Enter PayPal at Home Depot. I spotted PayPal at Home Depot just last week. What do I need? My finger, my phone number, and my PayPal pin number. I don’t need anything plastic, magnetic, paper, leather, and I don’t need a phone.

I don’t need batteries. My finger runs on food from the cafeteria and the vending machines.

What equipment do the merchants need to install? Nothing. PayPal ties into existing PIN pads. No RFID readers, no phone readers, no squares, and no triangles. It’s low tech. It’s simple.

There are a lot of companies and a lot of technologies out to transform the payment landscape: Square, Google Wallet, Apple’s iWallet, CashEdge, and even my company’s own DPXPay. But will PayPal’s simple finger, no battery, merchant-friendly approach beat them all? E Pluribus Unum? Out of many, one?

Guest blogger Jeb Cashin counts pennies at Harland Clarke by day… and often at night.

A note from Bob Williams – I’ve known Jeb for about 15 years and we share a common employer. He’s been a colleague, an internal customer, and my direct manager during that time. Many thanks to him for providing this thoughtful and entertaining look at the landscape of payments. 

Related posts:

1. How do you make Person-to-Person Payments?
2. Putting perspective on P2P payments
3. The irony of change

Pigeonholed is an expression with various meanings depending on context. For this writing, I’m referring to it as a verb meaning “to assign to a definite place or to definite places in some orderly system”. We use the term to refer to people in the workplace that are locked into a position or a set of responsibilities based on past achievements. Colleagues, management, and others place a label on the person which makes changes in positions or responsibilities difficult.

One of the reasons workers get pigeonholed is they perform well and there is no one else in the organization that knows how to do what they are doing. Often there is not a sense of priority to make sure the person has a back-fill or that that work rotates among people. Organizations get caught up in managing the day-to-day operations of the business and personnel matters are often pushed to the bottom of the to-do list.

Cheryl Dahle captures this thought in an article in Fast Company entitled Escape Your Pigeonhole.  Dahle explains the conundrum as “How do you develop the expertise to be known as the go-to guy or gal for certain projects or jobs without getting so tightly defined that you’re stuck working on the same project (or in the same industry) year after year?”

The remainder of Dahle’s article gives four areas of practical advice that professionals can use to escape and avoid the pigeonhole. A common theme in her recommendations is that we are responsible for moving our own careers towards paths that interest us and that match with our skills and strengths. We can’t rely on our managers, human resources, or anyone else to take us there.

What are you doing about it?
A former colleague once told me that “everyone should be fired or reassigned from their current jobs every three years.” His idea may seem a bit extreme, but his point was that companies benefit more from fresh ideas this way. It keeps workers motivated and challenged and allows them to grow. His thought follows the same mindset as executive leadership programs within some companies where they identify employees with “leadership potential” and change their job function and responsibility every 24 months.  It’s a form of job rotation.

But there is only so much an individual has control over in their workplace. Even if they are doing things to avoid a pigeonhole and to advance to other areas, there is no guarantee they’ll change perceptions of others. Which is exactly why this is a difficult condition to avoid. Just how do you change someone’s perception of you?

I’ve been pigeonholed.
In my personal career I’ve had success and failure getting locked into a position. I know of two times that I have been boxed-in by a pigeonhole. In both cases I had to leave the situation to escape the hole.

The first time was after I entered the organization as a college cooperative student (similar to intern). I stayed with the company after I graduated because they offered me full-time employment. After a couple of years however, it became apparent that management still thought of me as a college co-op student. There really wasn’t any opportunities to continue personal growth. To get out of that pigeonhole I had to leave the company.

The second time was with an employer that no longer exists (due to acquisition). I worked in the IT group as a product manager for many years and sought to advance within IT leadership by moving into management and gaining a broader breadth of responsibility. I felt I was a good fit because I had previously been in roles of analyst, project manager, and network engineer which gave me knowledge of systems, networks, and programming. I knew the business side more than most because of exposure to clients and Sales. But management went through a time of hiring outside people into the positions I was interested in serving. I was told at one point “Just keep doing what you are doing. You are good at it” (AKA – pigeonhole). To escape this pigeonhole I finished a MBA and applied for a position in eCommerce Marketing. It worked and I moved on to new challenges and opportunities for service and learning outside of IT.

Why does it matter?
Getting pigeonholed limits our experiences. It cuts down on the skills we could develop. It reduces the breadth of opportunities which directly influences career choices. This isn’t a power-play to climb the traditional “corporate ladder”. It’s about personal satisfaction with our work and output. It’s about serving others by staying motivated. It’s about learning and growing.

I’d love to hear your experience on this topic. Have you avoided being pigeonholed? Have you escaped a pigeonhole?

Related posts:

1. My Work Philosophy

What’s really the purpose of the badge? It’s certainly a quick way to show group affiliation. It’s a way to show support for a cause or effort. It can also be a way to advertise for a professional group.  I see the badge as a digital stamp that tells those viewing our profiles a little bit more about who we are. The message of the badge is group membership.

Groups on LinkedIn don’t get the same level of participation. Some of them are dead while others are active.

Chances are that you are a member of a healthy group that is active with discussions, collaboration, news sharing, job posts, etc. But you are probably also part of a group that is inactive. I’m talking about those that have no discussions and are just a list of names.

Why is that? For some people it may be that they are stuck in the mindset that LinkedIn is only a place people visit when they are actively seeking a job. Others might not participate because LinkedIn is blocked by their work internet policy and they don’t do “professional” type activities at home. But maybe it could also be related to the charter of the group itself. Whatever the case, LinkedIn groups develop their own culture. Some thrive and some don’t.

When I looked at the groups I have membership in, I classified them into three categories:

• Employment association
• University alumni
• Industry profession

The groups range in size from 20K+ members to a few hundred. In my case, the groups that are inactive are the ones associated with employment associations. One is understandable, it’s a company that no longer exists.

I know people actively create digital content for the internet. So what’s different about the LinkedIn group? Is it that contributing professional content is not part of the essential job duties? Is it that most people only think about their jobs from 8-5? Is it that they fear putting content on LinkedIn will make their employer think they are looking for a job? Or perhaps LinkedIn is beyond the tipping point of just how much time and content one can contribute to online communities.

So the group badge on a profile doesn’t mean active participation in that group.
Which is OK. But everyone should be aware that because I have a badge for some professional group doesn’t mean I’m an active participant. Personally speaking, I’ve held group memberships to several organizations where I have not been an active participant. I feel I either need to change that or drop the group. I want to keep my LinkedIn profile as accurate as possible about who I am and where I’m connected.

What do you think about badges on LinkedIn? How do you use them?

Related posts:

1. Thoughts on LinkedIn group membership
2. Followup to using LinkedIn for client forums
3. Networking. Is your circle too close?