the wet foot journey

Who Complains Online, and When It Makes Sense

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 02:38:00 +0000

Why do some unsatisfied customers choose to air their grievances online rather than directly to a store employee or manager? Wouldn't going directly to the source be more efficient, more immediate, and more satisfying?

Well, maybe not. My highly unscientific analysis revolves around certain dangerous personality traits that a company definitely does not want (but can't always avoid) in an unsatisfied customer.

The Trifecta of Troublesome Customer Traits

Passive aggressive
A passive aggressive personality resists following logical behaviors in interpersonal or occupational situations. In my opinion, passive aggressive behavior is most obvious when one chooses to avoid direct conflict but still seeks to make their feelings known though circuitous channels and indirect modes of communication.

Highly Emotional
Highly emotional folks are tied to a personal exchange in a way that would make a more temperate person cringe. They take things personally and may overthink a situation ad nauseam. During a heated debate, or even a civil disagreement, a highly emotional person's lip might quiver, they might trip over their words, their palms may sweat, or their voice may shake. This person definitely wants to avoid face to face confrontation.

Web Savvy
Really, you could take either of the above traits and pair it with a web savvy proclivity to end up with a PR and image problem. It's this combination that makes an unsatisfied customer dangerous in an online day and age. Because this (not so) fictional person won't keep their agitation and anger bottled up for long. It must be let out. Either on friends and family, or more efficiently to the faceless -- though interested and listening -- masses on the web.

And being web savvy nowadays is not what it used to be. It's almost painfully easy to make a web page, post a comment, write a review, etc. Using a search engine is not daunting to most people, and finding a place to vent is relatively simple.

I recently blogged about the variety of ways the average web savvy consumer can complain online*. In a nutshell, beyond the predictable company website feedback page, leave your complaints at both well-known and niche feedback and review sites. Blog (or vlog using a site like Utterz) about a bad experience. Create a simple web page (and use some basic SEO best practices to improve page rank). Make a video and put it on YouTube. And let loose on your social networks like Facebook, MySpace, and my personal favorite not-quite social network, Twitter.

When Complaining Online Makes Sense
It may be cathartic, but complaining online may not always be your best bet to get you whatever you're looking for (attention, compensation, progress, etc).

For large CPG companies, for instance, losing your business really isn't that big a deal. You're one in a million (or 10 million, for that matter) customers, and even if you email a friend or complain to your spouse, your dissatisfaction most likely won't make much of a dent to the company's bottom line.

This type of company doesn't have the incentive to keep you, personally, happy, and may be less inclined to go through hoops to make sure you're satisfied. If you challenge yourself to meet face to face with the enemy, it may yield wonderful results. But it may also only get you a weak apology, or even a bored look of annoyance.

[I think this attitude may be changing, as companies are becoming more aware of the increasing consumer movement to social media sites, and the impact those highly personal exchanges are to their business.]

On the other hand, if you are one of a very small customer base, as in a B2B environment, that company has an incentive to bend over backward so as not to lose your business. As long as your business makes economic sense to their vision and goals. Passive aggressive or emotional people may find a more sympathetic ear in this circumstance.

The Customer Experience Goes Both Ways
Finally, these customer traits could wind up being a blessing, because feedback can be both negative and positive. One only needs to look at the Zappos story that was gained a lot of attention last year to see how great customer service can really pay off.

*I'd like to mention that my online complaining paid off, literally, while my earlier letters to the managers and company executives yielded nada.

I'm No Good

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 19:11:00 +0000

I'm no good. I've been out of touch with this blog for too long. I love writing it, but am focusing right now on finishing up my MBA -- statistics, financial management, simulation modeling, and mastery of execution (I love the name of that course) are demanding a lot of time. I promise to be back. Thanks for your patience!

A Web 2.0 Directory for Early Adopters

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:22:00 +0000

I just happened upon Go2Web20.net, a visual directory of over 2000 web 2.0 sites. Their About page claims it's a site for early adopters. I don't know if that's true, but I love being an early adopter -- it's so seldom that can say I am. But I like this site because it reminds me that there is SO MUCH out on the web that I never knew I was missing.

Simply scroll over a logo, and a little blurb about that site appears. No lag time, no clutter, no sales pitch. You can also search within a category via a tag cloud. My only wish would be to have a rating system in order to make some sort of judgment whether or not to click thru.

The simple design of the site makes it painfully obvious of the appeal or lack thereof of a logo design and name. I found myself scrolling over the cool looking logos or the logos that had a name with some reference to a topic I was interested in.

An unintentional benefit of go2web20.net is that a new web 2.0 company could use it as a quick and dirty brand appeal evaluation tool, by comparing their logo/name to their competitors in the same space. A survey using the resulting page would give a company some insight over their logo design/name strength, which could be useful for initial sales or adoption efforts.

For the record, I found this link via Jeremiah Owyang via a tweet on Twitter. Finding cool stuff that other people endorse is one of the reasons I love Twitter.

Twitter Google SuperTuesday Mashup Is Cool

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 01:44:00 +0000

I know it's a weak title for this post, but the Twitter / Google mashup map is cool, and I wanted to talk about it briefly as I am engaged with it. (map courtesy of TechCrunch)

As I sit on my couch watching coverage of the primaries on CNN, I'm also following the map on my laptop. People from all over the world are commenting -- from California to Maine, to Brazil and Spain.

I love the instant connection of commenting and talking to others on my twitter feed. But to actually see people's locations pop up every couple of seconds on the map makes the circle that I follow feel even more personal. It not just an avatar I can relate to, but a place, and that place no longer feels so distant or removed.

--

On a more business-y note, an article on Techcrunch talks about Google collaborating with Twitter on this mashup, despite purchasing a Twitter rival, Jaiku, last fall. I like that Google values the Twitter audience, and recognizes something special about us (our numbers? our locations? our influencer status? our early adopter behaviors?).

Does this mean Twitter will become more mainstream (if it isn't already)? I love the connections I make on Twitter -- the authors of the blog feeds I follow, and the people I talk to on Gooruze are on Twitter. I value their opinions, and like that I can find them all in one place. For professional development, its a huge influencer and guide.

Kia's Making an Effort, Social Media Made it Happen

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 04:18:00 +0000

I wanted to write this before I forget. My Kia issues have been resolved. After just 2 weeks of venting my Kia frustrations via social media outlets, they finally contacted me to help us move toward a resolution.

Suffice it to say, my happiness can be bought. Essentially, I'm a cheap date, and I'm a sucker for some nice words and a little effort. I'd rather be in a positive relationship than a negative one, so I'll keep up my end of the bargain if they will. Are you tired of the cliche's yet? I'll move on.

Anyway, the Kia customer service representative who I'm working with said something interesting during our talks. Though Kia received my complaint letter via snail mail back in August 2007, it wasn't until they saw one of my numerous social media posts that they acted. Apparently, there are some sites Kia monitors, and one of my rants came to their attention.

He alluded to the fact that Kia, and other companies he was familiar with, are still trying to wrap their heads around these types of conversations being posted on the web, and how to go about mediating them. Given my interest and research into the topic of companies using social media, I'm not surprised.

I'm only disappointed that it had to go this far. That I had to invest the time and effort to post my grievances online -- all the while getting more angry -- to finally get their attention.

But I was a little surprised (and very pleased) that the customer service representative didn't ask me to remove or update any of my posts. I've decided to update them voluntarily, because I feel it's the responsible thing to do.

Batman and Cross Industry Viral Techniques

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:20:00 +0000

I've been thinking about Batman lately. More specifically, I've been thinking of the way the entertainment industry leverages social media and viral marketing campaigns months (years) before the launch of a movie -- like Warner Bros has with the upcoming Batman movie -- and if this strategy could be used in other industries.

The Wall Street Journal recently ran an article about Heath Ledger and how his death might affect the Batman viral advertising campaign, seeing as how Ledger plays the Joker, and it is largely centered around his character. This campaign, designed by 42 Entertainment, began last May at Ibelieveinharrydent.com, touting a Gotham City politician, and slowly blossomed into focus on the Joker.

The campaign is centered on user participation, encouraging fans to learn more about the movie by sending them on scavenger hunts and playing games. Popular film news sites were also supplied with updated viral information, and microsites devoted to different aspects of the movie were created. Participants in the Batman journey were rewarded with trailers, posters and photos.

Viral campaigns are designed to create word of mouth promotion in an under the radar sort of way. It is becoming the norm, especially with big-budget movies, to attempt to generate buzz early on hoping it will help recoup some of the enormous financial costs associated with movie production. TV shows leverage this kind of engagement with the audience also -- both Lost and The Office (two favorites of mine) make use of participation-based social applications to promote their shows.

But I'm wondering if viral advertising like this can be used for non-entertainment industries. It obviously appeals to a certain type of consumer -- one who has a vested (obsessive?) interest in a product/service and who is not only web savvy but is willing to sacrifice his or her disposable time to this activity.

The industry, too, must have a product/service that lends itself to the elaborate, complex, and extended-timeline qualities this type of viral marketing entails.

So, what about fashion? Trends in fashion are not easily predicted a year in advance, but a fashion obsessed consumer might feel privileged to get a sneak peak on the direction of next seasons colors or silhouettes.

Education? Universities may be able to build excitement for prospective students by targeting high school students (male athletes?) with snippets of messages or podcasts featuring prominent athletes and coaches, or encouraging participation in complex online games with rewards like sporting event tickets (I can't help it, I'm thinking of my alma mater, Ohio State University and the football team here -- Go Bucks!). Sporting organizations in general are comparable to the entertainment industry, and could certainly leverage viral campaigns, if they don't already.

Apple, Harley, Disney -- these are some companies where "elaborate, complex, and extended timeline" could fit into their marketing advertising strategies. I'm still fuzzy on how these qualities apply to other industries. CPG? Healthcare? But I just wanted to put my thoughts out there before I move on to my next random idea.

Use Your Name Wisely, Have No (few) Regrets Later

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 03:49:00 +0000

How often do you leave a comment on another blog? A review site? A forum? Do you use your real name? Or something off the wall, like kittyclaws39, 123abc, or buhby (these just came to mind...for the record I do not use these names).

I use my name. But not Kathy Milette, the name most people know me by. I use Kathryn Milette. Why? I don't know...I just started and stuck to it. If you do a search for Kathy Milette, you'll most likely find out about my rowing career in college. If you search for Kathryn Milette, you'll find my social media involvement. If I really analyzed it (it doesn't take much effort), I use the name Kathryn Milette for professional reasons. I only post comments and thoughts that I won't (hopefully) regret anyone seeing, either now or 10 years from now.

I sometimes imagine the political impact if our current presidential hopefuls used social media outlets when they were kids. It's already relatively easy to find dirt on any one of them. But what if those hopefuls had had MySpace pages where they posted racy pictures of themselves from a frat party? (I wish this were the case for a certain Oregon mayor who shall not be named, but hers were posted intentionally and recently.)

Or if they posted some strong, questionable opinions to a political forum? Opinions that youth, idealism and naivete influenced, but came roaring back to bite them in the you know what 30 years later.

When choosing to use your real name in social media circles, you are essentially etching your opinions and thoughts in stone. Only this stone is indexed by search engines and is highly retrievable.

It may sound premature and doomsday-ish, but I think this is a good lesson to teach our kids in this online, engaged, interactive day and age. Not only is it safer for children not to post personal information online, but it's probably a wise career move, too. They won't care now, but they will probably (definitely) regret some of the things they made public when they were just being stupid kids.

The Customer Journey Starts With Me

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:28:00 +0000

In my troubles with Kia (by the way, they got wind of my social media blitz, and gave me a call this week -- I'm encouraged, but more on this situation later) I've discovered something important about the customer journey.

The journey doesn't start at the door, to either a brick and mortar store or to a brand's landing page. It doesn't start with a company at all. It starts wherever the customer begins their own individual journey that minute, day, year. And this starting point matters. Let me tell you why.

I'll use my Kia experience as an example. When I have a problem with our van and have to bring it in, my experience does not start once I walk through the customer service door. It starts when I have to pack toys, snacks and juice bottles and extra changes of clothes and diapers -- necessities for time spent in a waiting room with two toddlers.

It continues when I have to bundle my children up and cart each one out to the van individually over sometimes icy sidewalks or snow. Barring any frozen door problems -- in which case I would have had to maneuver the children through the front doors and wiggle through to the back seat and buckle them in -- we all drive 20 minutes to the Kia dealership.

That's when the journey really starts. So if my Kia has multiple problems, and I have to experience this tedious journey often, it would be appropriate if the reception I get at the customer service door acknowledges and tries to mediate my troubles. After all, they've got my extensive service history at their fingertips.

You can translate this into an online experience as well. For instance, during the holidays, many people are using the web to shop from a variety of stores.

But if your website is hard to navigate, or your site has a tricky spelling and doesn't show up in search, or if it takes a long time to load, a user may be turned off to your brand. Not because any of these problematic qualities in particular, but because in comparison to the other sites they have been to, yours is not measuring up.

When I write stuff like this, I'm always looking for the takeaway. In this case, recognizing the starting point of the customer journey is important, because other brands, and other experiences, set expectations for your brand.

You may not be able to control these externalities, and you may not always be able to live up to such high standards. But you can do your best to make your destination in a user's journey as painless and as pleasurable as possible by paying attention to their activities and interactions with your brand (your store, your site, the experience you offer).

And being helpful (i.e. a site's ease of use, or a store's quick and successful product fix) and friendly (i.e. a site giving recommendations based on past preferences, or a store's acknowledgment and apology of excessive service visits) -- not either helpful or friendly -- goes a long way in a customer relationship.

Observations on the Twitter Experience

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 01:32:00 +0000

I've been using Twitter for almost a month now. I finally took the plunge to join after Jeremiah Owyang published an article about his Twitter experiences.

Taking the plunge sounds so dramatic. What was I waiting for? I was kind of intimidated. I really didn't know what I'd have to say and I didn't know anyone who used it. But Jeremiah said he'd follow me (well, anyone that added him) if I (we) followed him. So, I was guaranteed one "friend," and I joined.

It's been a very strange experience. It took a while to understand the time line. And I felt a little more comfortable once I read Caroline Middlebrooke's Twitter Guide. I follow more people (26) than follow me (13), which is fine since I still really don't know anyone anyway. My rationale is the more people I follow the better feel I'll have for the Twitter experience.

Most people I follow or who are following me I "know" in the sense that I've seen them on other blogs or social networks. But some I haven't a clue how we got hooked up. Besides people, I also follow w00t and Hoosgot.

Initially, it seemed like everyone was just sending out random updates into the cosmos. Some tweets are self-promotional ("Check out my latest blog post"), some are slice of life ("Feeling sorry the redskins lost"), some are personal ("Happy Birthday, Tumar"), some are more professional chit chat ("By using Anchor Free to get around Hulu, the up speed improves as well"). Conversations are really all over the board.

Strangely enough, is still feels like a close community despite the fact that it's not immediately apparent who is following who or who is talking to or answering who (did you follow that?!). And in my case, though I rarely directly respond to anyone or have anyone respond to me, I don't feel like an outsider.

And, no, I'm not a lurker. While I have used Twitter to get the scoop on some stories to Mixx, I still post what's on my mind or what I'm doing. But it has taken a while to get comfortable enough to do so. Twitter really blurs personal and professional. And it's a surprising difficult hurdle for me to leap.

In my one month's experience with Twitter, I've come to the conclusion that one would have to be incredibly organized, attentive, and selective if they were going to go either strictly the personal or professional route. But they would be all about what web 2.0 is NOT -- closed, exclusionary and in complete control.

Twitter is about engaging and participating, and its about letting go and learning from others. You don't have to divulge the most intimate parts of your life, but you also don't need to be super professional, precise, or perfect. It's okay to tell your followers that you're taking your son to baseball practice, or give them advice where they can buy a good sump pump (yes, this has happened), because you'll just as soon give point them to free keyword sites, recommend a great business book, or request some feedback for a new blog article. All in 140 characters or less!

I still look at it as more of a Learning About Twitter exercise than an engagement tool. But I hope that will flip flop. I think there are a lot of people like me who see a great potential in Twitter, but haven't figured out what that is yet.

9 Ways Social Media Can Hurt a Brand

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:55:00 +0000

*Note, this article was originally only a very brief bullet point summary of the full article, which was posted earlier this week on Court's Internet Marketing School. But social media can damage a brand that is slacking in their responsibilities to the customer, and I didn't feel the bullet points did the article justice, and it was getting under my skin! The article now posted here (which is slightly different than the original) can also be seen on Gooruze , my favorite online marketing network (any time I can give it a plug I will!)

I have a beef with Kia, the automotive company. My experience with them and my Sedona minivan leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But why should you care? Because, with social media, I now have so many more interesting ways to have my voice heard -- if not by a company that doesn't seem to want to listen, than by a community of consumers who rely more and more on peer reviews and recommendations. And I'd like to share these ways with you, in case you've got a beef of your own.

A couple of years ago, I would have gone through the following motions to log my complaint.

Talk with a company representative
Write a complaint e-mail to whatever contact is listed on the corporate website
Do a little research and write a complaint letter cc:ing various managers and executives
Contact a consumer hot line and maybe the better business bureau

After a bit of brainstorming, below are a list of ways a person could leverage social media channels to broadcast their displeasure with a company.

Write an Article and Pay Attention to SEO Copywriting Best Practices
Post it on your blog or be a guest blogger. You don't need to be a professional to do some SEO best practices, like pay attention to page titles and picking keywords to use throughout the article (plus combinations and variations of them).

Make a Web Page While in a Spiteful Mood
If your not in the mood to do it from scratch, set up a webpage the quick and painless (and free) way using Google Pages. Buy a domain name and point it to your page if you want it to seem a little more official. You could also make a Squidoo Lens for some attention from the Squidoo community. And if your feeling particularly spiteful, post positive reviews of the competitors products to your pages.

Put a Video on YouTube
In the case of Kia, I think potential Kia minivan owners would be interested to watch me try to put three toddlers into the carseats of our Sedona, in the middle of winter, with both sliding side doors frozen shut (not to mention all the windows, so no drive-thru coffee on a cold winter's day. Boo-hoo.)

Exploit Your Social Networks
Join social networking groups that could sympathize with your cause. Unfortunately, the people in these groups are already in your camp, and it is more a place to let off steam. If your comfortable with being obnoxious, join groups that love the company in question and air your woes on their message boards. You could also download an widget application that lets you post reviews of your stuff, like "IGot" for Facebook. Don't forget to tweet your network on Twitter with quick quips about the company.

Troll the Company's Corporate Blog, Seek out Sympathetic Blogs, Pitch Your Woes, Comment Your Complaints
Leave a message (or two) on the company's corporate blog to get your voice heard. Also, find blogs that might be sympathetic to your cause and might help you get some traction to your web page or video.

Submit to Social News and Social Bookmarking Sites
With any luck, readers might submit your article to places like Mixx, Digg, StumbleUpon, Sphinn...pick your flavor. And bookmarking to places like Del.icio.us or Furl will help gain some added exposure.

Don't Forget the Complements
There are so many complement community sites that, if one was willing to put forth the energy, they could spread their message of displeasure all over the web. For instance, complementary sites to my Kia concerns might be places for parents to talk to each other, like IVillage or ParentsConnect -- communities with message boards and forums discussing children and everything associated with them, including recommendations for minivans.

Leave Ratings and Reviews on Relevant Websites
This is probably the most obvious complaint route with the least time investment required. Just copy and paste your reviews anywhere than will let you.

Finally, Encourage a Vicious Cycle and Go for a Chain Reaction
As a last and final step, shoot your family and close friends an email (or a tweet or IM), including your web page URL and your YouTube link. If you're passionate enough about a poor customer experience to spam your loved ones with your troubles, you're bound to get some sympathy, and maybe a forward or two along to their friends and family.

--

The tactics above may not be a good fit for every person who is angry with a company and wants to be heard. For instance, I realize I'm a bit passive aggressive -- I made a web page about Kia, but would never leave comments on their blog. But social media gives the average consumer new places to vent, to rant, to share, to provoke, and to discover a community of like-minded souls. The list above is a launching pad for some of the most obvious places to reach others with your thoughts and experiences -- both positive and negative. What are some other ways we can get our points across?

Top 5 Interactive Agency Websites

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 01:07:00 +0000

I've narrowed down the five most visually impressive interactive agency websites in the web design space. And the winner is...Schematic. But don't you want to know the rest? If you are interested in my analysis parameters and rationale, read on. If you just want to skip to the good stuff, scroll down.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I've been visiting a lot of interactive agency corporate sites lately. I'm graduating next year from business school, and am considering working on the agency side, having already done the client side for several years.

So, I pulled AdAge's Top 50 interactive agency list* published earlier this year, and visited all the companies mentioned. All 50. It took a while.

Being the nerd that I am, I set up a spreadsheet, evaluating each website on service offerings and overall site impression. For one, I am interested in how each company talks about themselves (are they a digital agency, an interactive experience agency, an internet marketing agency, and what is the difference), and wanted to see trends in service offerings.

But every agency is so all over the board with their service mix (if they even talked about services), audience (healthcare, CPG, entertainment, retail, etc), and focus (being a partner vs a provider). AdAge also lumps a lot of services within interactive, including web design, web strategy, SEO, analytics, social media, technology, content management, etc. Most service titles and descriptions were a lesson in semantics, and I quickly realized it didn't make sense approaching my analysis in such a straightforward way.

I also wanted to see which agency I thought was the most visually impressive (sites that made me say "wow") looking from the perspective of a potential interactive design client. Please note I said design. This does not necessarily take into site navigation, architecture, copy, or content. I didn't read or look at every page on the site. I let the site take me on its own journey, and left when I felt the experience was complete.

So here we go...counting down to #1.

Top 5 Interactive Agency Websites

#5 DRAFTFCB (ranked #9 by AdAge)
At first, DRAFTFCB didn't make my list. I thought the home page was a little self indulgent (leading with their press, and graphics (though cool) relating to their office locations. It also seemed overly stark. It was when I clicked on "Who We Are" that I started to get excited. A video of someone writing in a journal describes the company. The music with the page is a little reminiscent of Beetlejuice, but eerily provacative.

#4 Arc Worldwide (ranked #25 by AdAge)
Arc Worldwide's site was unexpected, from the colors used to the geometric design pattern. A"ping" sounds when you click on different sections. Theirs is a very dynamic site -- a really nice use of scroll-over movement without being overkill. It's easy to read, sophisticated, and professional but not traditional.

#3 Rapp Collins Worldwide (ranked #5 by AdAge)
If you can be patient and let this site take its sweet time to load, the result is an incredibly innovative and impressive design. Rapp Collins' home page was initially super confusing, yet I knew I would love it if only I could figure it out. Which I eventually did (scroll up and down by putting your mouse at the top or bottom of the screen). This site is so gorgeous it should be illegal. I mean, they've designed cell phone flowers with hummingbirds flying in to drink out of them.

This site would have been my number one pick except for two deal breaking reasons. 1) Every page takes forever to load. That may be fine for design connoisseurs with terabytes of RAM and uber fast connection speeds, but my 512 RAM and 1.7GHz, DSL connection made it painful. 2) the "Creative Philosophy" page initially seemed very cool -- personalize the content for your audience. But it required me to fill out a form about myself to move forward, which, beyond the lifetime it took me to load the page, was too much of a time investment.

#2 Wirestone (ranked #43 by AdAge)
I was almost only going to look at the top 30 of AdAge's list, but I'm glad I looked at them all. #43 is #2 on this list because the site is not only visually beautiful (stellar quality and use of case study photography), but loads quickly, is easy to navigate, and above all, it's one of those sites where I feel that what I see is what I'd get from the company. Approachable but excellent. If I were a client or an employee of Wirestone, this site would make me proud to be associated with them.

#1 Schematic (ranked #28 by AdAge)
When I first came to this site, I (shamefully) admit I thought they were trying too hard to be different Aside from the requisite, gorgeous rotating image at the top, there are only large, bullet-point aqua color text links on the page.

But just click on a link, any link -- and don't blink. The page transitions are AMAZING! I don't know how else to express how impressed I was. If you haven't yet clicked on the link to Schematic, here's a visual. Imagine all the pages being printed out and then taped to a large wall in a grid-like pattern, and imagine looking through a video camera as you move from page to page -- up, down, sideways, and diagonally. The photography is also fantastic. So clean, so vivid.

I can't say enough about how much I enjoyed surfing Schematic's site. The visual gymnastics rival only Rapp Collins, but the site is so much more user friendly, it deserves to be #1.

Honorable Mentions
I can't help but mention some other sites that I enjoyed looking at. Resource's portfolio is a beautiful experience to browse through. AKQA leads off with a very well done (and in the case of Fiat, very fun) case study teaser. Brulant has a dynamic and interesting rotating graphic on their home page, and IconNicholson lets a visitor change the home page graphic to one of their own choosing.

It was not always only the visual that impressed me. I couldn't help but read and love Blast Radius' credo page. And Sapient had a very clean and professional site that nicely divided up their core competencies -- interactive and consulting.

Overall Impressions
I really enjoyed this research experience, and gained a lot of insight and perspective looking through these sites. One impression I had was that these agencies were forced to make a definitive positioning decision -- either appeal to a potential client's pragmatic business side, or wow them with design. Many chose to blend these goals and the result is a tame but professional experience. And most tried to weave in language recognizing design for business strategy results.

A second observation was that these agencies listed services like social media, mobile, and analytics alongside more traditional offerings like user experience design, branding/identity, and media planning/buying. I also I found that I really liked having case studies profiled or teased on the home page. And the final take away is that too many sites took too long to load, and often the wait wasn't worth it.

So what companies have I missed? Leave a comment with some of your favorites.

*AdAge determines rank by revenues, and notes % revenue change over previous year

Is Elf Yourself a Success?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:37:00 +0000

I admit that I don't completely understand the rationale of obscure viral marketing campaigns.

Case in point: You Got Elfed. Earlier this week I wrote an article about the disconnect of OfficeMax's elfyourself.com campaign. The dancing elves -- while admittedly highly amusing -- have nothing to do with OfficeMax, office products, the office, etc. In fact, I guessed that while many people would enjoy creating the emails, they wouldn't associate this campaign with OfficeMax. So where is the value to OfficeMax?

There are two reasons I think OfficeMax went with this campaign. Either a) they are thinking very, very long term about brand awareness and positioning, or, b) they realize the potential power of social media campaigns and wanted to play in this arena. Hopefully, it is a combination of both.

A quick summary of the previous article: This is the second year for the Elf Yourself viral campaign, and they have added Scrooge Yourself to the 2007 holiday season. OfficeMax's svp of marketing, Bob Thacker, said "[the Elf Yourself campaign] gives OfficeMax a heart and a personality." Presumably, sometime down the road, people will start thinking OfficeMax (no, they are not Office Depot) when deciding where to buy a stapler.

After I posted this viral marketing article on this blog over a week ago, I started getting more traffic to my site than I have since its inception, mostly by way of search. As I looked at the site stats, I marveled over the keywords that were bringing people to this article. I decided to whip together a spreadsheet and do some very crude analysis of the effectiveness of this strategy.

In the 10 days or so since the article was published, 48% of keyword traffic was simply combinations of "elf yourself," "elfed," "dancing elves," etc. No mention of a company.

If you strip away those visitors, we are left with those people who specified a company name along with "elf," "elf yourself," etc. The results:

43% of people named Office Max in their search criteria
34% named Staples
16% named Office Depot
The rest were totally confused and thought the campaign was either Target's or Home Depot's.

As I look at these numbers, and considering this is year two for Elf Yourself, I wonder how OfficeMax interprets <50% brand awareness from this viral campaign. What do you think?

--

I posted this article first on Gooruze this Wednesday and got some interesting feedback. Some thought that the mere fact that marketers are talking about Elf Yourself gives the campaign buzz and is therefore worthwhile compared to it's relatively low cost. It's not a point that I had considered, and am not sure if I find it to be a truly compelling argument for the campaign's value because it almost feels less like a "why do this" strategy, and more like a "why not do this" whim.

However, I like getting different perspectives from the bright and engaged people who participate in this online marketing community, and wanted to spread the word.

Page Titles: the Good, the Dull, and the Terrible

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 04:08:00 +0000

I recently read an article by Matt McGee about SEO and the importance of page titles. The topic is not really riveting, but as someone interested in learning more about search engine optimization, I thought the article was pretty informative and well written. I've never given much thought to page titles, but I started paying attention while researching interactive agencies for an upcoming blog article.

I have been sifting through dozens of interactive agency sites, searching for them first on Google so I could get a look at these page titles. Beyond evaluating the SEO qualities of them, I viewed them more from a brand standpoint, as the titles are the first clue into the company experience.

I was stunned how inconsistent some of these titles were with each other. I thought they would all be somewhat similar, and all outstanding. After all, while I expect interactive agencies to show superiority in design and user experience, I also expect sophisticated communication and word-smithing capabilities, and I didn't always see that.

The Good
To be fair, many of the page titles I saw were great, or at least pretty good. One I liked a lot was "Helps organizations define, build, measure, and expand their Internet strategy and presence." Informative, succinct, approachable, right? Here is another one I thought was pretty good -- "Specializing in the integration of technology, marketing and design." To the point, and easy to digest.

The Dull
Then there are the dull page titles. For instance, "Provides web development for large businesses," or, "A digital marketing company that specializes in collaborative web development solutions to enhance your business – and your visibility." These titles are fine, though a bit boring, and in the latter case, somewhat dirty (I wish they had left off everything after "solutions" -- it just sounds sales-y).

I'm also not a fan of page titles that have "award-winning" in them. Awards may be an account qualifier or winner later on, but I think that kind of phrasing is self-serving and better placed inside a site than espoused right off the bat.

The Terrible
Now onto the worst. You might think that the worst is a site without a title. Not so, though there are plenty of those. The worst is not even when the page title says "This site requires Macromedia Flash Player Version 7. Download Plugin."

No, the absolute worst page title I came across is "To view this site, you need the latest Flash plug-in. It's quick and easy to download, and well worth it!" Ugh. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I didn't even want to open the page. And when I did, I had to scroll up and down AND left and right. It was a very unsatisfying experience

Despite a crappy or lackluster page title, it was the content of the site that mattered, and many of the sites were great. I would say that page titles are an SEO priority for rank. As a brand communication element, a page title may influence a casual user browsing for an interactive agency, but I wouldn't expect that it would be earth shattering if a title doesn't measure up to the rest of the site experience.

Unless, of course, the title says "To view this site, you need the latest Flash plug-in. It's quick and easy to download, and well worth it!" That is just neglectful, and a turn-off. If you were to put a personal ad in the paper, you wouldn't say, "Must get a makeover before even thinking of contacting me. But you'll want to. Because I'm worth the trouble." It's just a little thing, really. But this little change could mean the difference between a site visit, an agency interview, a project, an account, a relationship.

Tags: Page Title, SEO

You Got Elfed, and Other Viral Marketing Disconnects

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 02:55:00 +0000

[I just registered on gooruze.com, and in order to link to my blog, I have to write kathrynmilette.gooruze.com in the first few lines of my post. As Tanya Ferrell noted, this is a pretty slick marketing tactic.]

In the spirit of the holidays, I got elfed by my husband. In case you have no idea what I'm referring to, getting elfed means receiving an interactive dancing elf email, and in my case, with our family's heads superimposed on the elves.

And all in the name of promoting OfficeMax, the #3 North American office products retailer behind Staples and OfficeDepot.

Well, I didn't get elfed last holiday season, which is when OfficeMax first launched this viral campaign. This year, it was relaunched along with Scrooge Yourself.

But what the heck do these campaigns have to do with selling office supplies?

Before we get to that, I am reminded of other interactive viral campaigns. Namely Monk E-Mail by CareerBuilder, launched along with the office monkey ads during the 2006 Superbowl. And the Subservient Chicken campaign by Burger King, launched back in April of 2004, starting first online, then followed up with a television campaign.

But what value do these types of participation-based viral campaigns return to the host companies?

Increased Brand/Product Awareness
I'm on the fence with this one. I thought the Monk E-Mail was for Monster.com until I just looked it up. And I wasn't positive exactly which fast food restaurant the Subservient Chicken belonged to...Chick-Fil-A was my next guess. Maybe its just been too long. As for the dancing elves...what exactly have they got to do with OfficeMax?

In the case of the Subservient Chicken, Joseph Jaffe (a writer and blogger who's articles I very much enjoy) mentions that the wrong question to ask is "Did it sell chicken?" and presumably get more feet in the door. The right question to ask is, "Did you know BK sold chicken?" And now you do. That's a good point, and one I hadn't thought of.

However, let's try to apply that logic to OfficeMax's dancing elves. Did you know associates dance at OfficeMax? No, wait...Did you know it's the holidays and there are elf dolls you can buy at OfficeMax? No, that doesn't work either.

Obviously, I'm saying this tongue in cheek, but I don't understand why the meaning behind the campaigns is so obscure. In regards to the Subservient Chicken, Snopes.com had to verify the "myth" that it was a BK ad campaign? I mean, if users don't see the connection, where is the value?

Positioning Strategy
I think this is more in line with the marketing strategy. Office supplies are boring. Perhaps OfficeMax wanted to spice things up. Now they are the fun office supply store. Right? That's what Bob Thacker, OfficeMax's svp of marketing thinks. "It gives OfficeMax a heart and a personality."

And for Burger King? In 2004, Greg Brenneman was called in as CEO to get the #2 hamburger chain back on track. The quirky advertising was part of an overall marketing campaign to target BK "superfans" -- 18- to 34-year-old men. According to BK's financial statements, in the three years following the ad campaigns, Burger King's revenues steadily increased. Was this due to the marketing campaign? They also introduced the $1 value menu, and their operating margins improved. These factors may have influenced the improvement. Also, some of BK's franchisees have argued the campaign turned off women and family business suffered.

OfficeMax has also seen financial gains in their income statements in the form of improved operating margins (though decreased revenues). However, they are also experiencing a large restructuring effort, so it's difficult to gauge the ROI of the campaign.

Overall, I think this is a long term positioning strategy, to set the stage for future corporate initiatives. I think that to expect a sustainable increase in revenues simply as a result of these fun ads is a mistake, mainly because their connection to the company is forgettable.

Search For a Larger Audience
People are increasingly choosing to spend more of their time online. And they are communicating with each other in a way that radio and television cannot. Brands are finding that this interaction helps promote increased word of mouth recommendations -- you can blast 30 friends with an email (telling them about a great new site called elfyourself.com!) in a couple of seconds, but it would take a prohibitively longer amount of time to phone them all.

Also, these types of interactive, participation-based campaigns can help illustrate how considerate these companies are of the consumer's evolving lifestyle, and at the same time they help to keep the brand relevant and modern.

Furthermore, when brands are able to leverage social media and experiment online, they have the opportunity to discover how to create more meaningful ways to communicate to customers, and have a greater flexibility to adjust messages on a dime.

And simply from a cost perspective, brands can be in more places online than they can off. A one-page ad in the WSJ could eat up some companies entire annual marketing budget.

So What's My Takeaway
Having said all this, I continue to question the relevance of creating a great viral marketing campaign that has no clear, or even semi-clear, connection to your brand's function.

I think the Monk E-Mail stands out as the best viral marketing campaign of the three mentioned. Like the others, it is certainly entertaining and recommendation worthy. But it is about the office, which is about working, which helps the audience associate working to jobs, to searching for jobs, to using CareerBuilder to search for jobs. Even its URL let's us know it's part of the CareerBuilder site.

The other examples lose something in the translation. The connection isn't clear, and the value created is weakened. Maybe these brands see the obscurity as part of a long, long-term strategy, and I just can't see that far. But I will continue to laugh, and maybe elf someone later.

Tags: Viral Marketing, Social Media

Beacon No More? Hardly

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:22:00 +0000

Just before Facebook announced its new advertising system, Beacon, I had written a post discussing how companies could leverage customers' social networks by letting them opt-in to place advertising on their social networking sites, using Facebook as an example.

After Facebook and Beacon have taken such a beating this week, have I changed my stance? No. I think there are definitely opportunities for Facebook to adjust their advertising model to both integrate advertising smoothly into their users web pages, as well as to increase Facebook's revenues in order to justify its $15 billion valuation.

Namely, if Facebook wants to make money off of their users personal data, then users should be able to share the wealth.

My previous example used an on-line banking example. Once someone purchased or consumed a banking product, they could have the option of including an ad (banner or text) on their Facebook page for X amount of days in exchange for an entry to win an IPod, or something to that effect.

This type of advertising is even more relevant than Beacon, because the consumer chooses the ad that fits into their lifestyle, and has a good chance of fitting into their networks probably similar lifestyle. Also, Facebook would receive a commission from the retailer for allowing their ad to be placed within the application.

Another example involves one of my favorite sites, thedailyplate.com (TDP). I am a TDP evangelist because I am so impressed by their customer service, the site's ease of use in comparison to competitive food journaling sites, and the overall experience I've had there. Suppose I'd like to include a banner ad TDP has into my Facebook page? I would gladly do so freely for a couple of days, Facebook gets a commission, and my network knows that I endorse this site. I suppose I could just post how much I like TDP to my wall, but this is simply another, more formal, option.

Would some people exploit this advertising model simply to make some money or win a prize like the first example? Probably. But I think there are other people who love certain brands and are willing to promote them for free.

I think Facebook's desire to have relevant information available to users is worthwhile. My suggestion is just an alternative the big-brother quality of the old Beacon model, to one of user participation and acceptance.

----

Updated: I've been reading more about Facebook's advertising options and I think what I have been suggesting in this article most closely resembles the Social Ads that Facebook already offers. These are contextual ads based on user preferences. However, if I understand correctly, and advertiser gets to place the ad based on a user's interaction with them (push marketing). It's not the user who specifically decides to place the ad (opt-in) on behalf of the advertiser.

Tags: facebook, social media, advertising

Some of the Blogs I Read and Why I Read Them

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:20:00 +0000

I am a voracious blog reader. I love learning and devour social media and marketing blogs. But it's not always easy keeping up, so I tend to make sure I read my favorites first. Right now, the following blogs are high on my list.

Seth Godins Blog
I think every marketer has heard of Seth Godin, and if you haven't, then you should check out his blog. He's insightful, current, and his posts come in bite size, easily digestable nuggets. Technorati ranks his blog in their top 25, The Viral Garden ranks his as the number one marketing blog, and AdAge lists Godin as a top marketer, with Steve Jobs coming in second.

Logic+Emotion
I stumbled upon Logic+Emotion a few months ago, and was drawn in because of David Armano's visual respresentations of social media. He is a designer and strategist, does a lot of speaking engagements, and writes with a sense of purity about social media concepts. Critical Mass, the company he works with, also has a blog that I enjoy.

Web Strategy by Jeremiah
Jerimiah Owyang is a Senior Analyst at Forrester specializing in social computing. He is very prolific, and can get long winded, but I find that what he writes is incredibly helpful in putting social media in perspective.

Common Sense: Internet Marketing Made Simple
Tanya Ferrell is an advertising student at the Art Institute of Pittsburgh. She doesn't write often, but when she does it is refreshing and current. I like the energy and enthusiasm in her writing and chosen topics. Plus, I love her site design, though the header sometimes doesn't seem to refresh properly in my browser.

Dosh Dosh - How to Make Money on the Web
In my opinion, most of the blogs I look at are intended to make money is some way. Either directly through advertising revenue, or indirectly through brand awareness, credibility, etc. Dosh Dosh is the former. If David Armano is a purist, Maki (Dosh Dosh's author) is the opposite. But he is very well written and researched, and I find his work to be very informative. Like Tanya, he, too, is a student, studying Political Science and Philosophy in Toronto, Canada.

Tags:
marketing, social media

Get Your Company To Know Your Customer

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:59:00 +0000

Before starting graduate school, I worked for an organization* that had an internal communication vehicle called the Buzz, which published several times a week on the company's intranet. The Buzz reported on company projects, new associates, new procedures, etc. Its purpose was to keep associates in the loop on the goings on of the company, and hopefully help them feel more engaged with its growing infrastructure.

Often, buzz stories centered on new client work - the unique demands of the project, the innovative services we were applying, and so on. But as I think about it, we never really got to know the customer. Sure, we would be briefed on the client company, but did we really know the actual people we were working for?

Often, when a consumer interacts with a faceless company, there is an emotional detachment that can lead to behaviors that would be regarded as unacceptable in a face to face encounter. Think about a time you wrote a scathing communication to an underperforming company (I'm guilty of it...this past summer Kia got an 'earful' from me in a very long, very detailed letter). And in a state of absolute frustration, consider how simple it is to harshly criticize a product feature on an organization’s community forum or feedback page.

This concept unfortunately also works in reverse. Have you ever noticed how much easier it is to let a deadline slip by (but it was just a day or so, you tell yourself) when the only interaction you've had with a client is over email? Or, when in a meeting with your coworkers you spoke in a careless or rude manner about a challenging client? After all, the client doesn’t really know what they want, do they? Before you know it, the impact of those detached behaviors could cost you a client relationship.

I think there is a great opportunity with corporate intranets to introduce associates to actual customers, the people they are working for one on one. Through a simple interview, an organization can provide a face to a project or customer - for example, a profile on Mark Smith, his role within his organization, reasons why he chose to work with your company or buy your product. Companies would better position their associates to provide an exceptional experience, namely because they would feel a greater degree of accountability when relating to a person rather than a corporation.

*I used to work for WD Partners, a firm specializing in delivering an exceptional prototype and rollout experience for national retail and restaurant clients.

Communities I Love and Who Are Doing It Right

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 04:34:00 +0000

Here is a random sample of some companies who I think are doing a great job engaging with their customers.

Cluttercontrolfreak.com
This site is Stacks and Stacks' blog devoted to the topic of organization. Admittedly, I'm not really familiar with the parent company (and I'm only a wannabe organization freak). However, what I love about this blog is that it's not a glorified Stacks and Stacks ad, but is a genuine resource for people who are crazy for organization. When I first came across it, almost accidentally, I was impressed that this seemingly modest, not overly impressive (that sounds harsh, but that's what I thought) company decided to connect with this niche market in an engaging way. I like that.

J Crew
I LOVE J Crew. Even if they sometimes make it hard, like when they tried to push plaid pants a couple of years ago. Anyway, they are so together in their marketing efforts. For me, it all starts with a direct e-mail notification (how did they know I'd cave last month and buy a sweater because they gave me free shipping?!). Then it moves on to the personal shopper experience (a new service they are promoting, and I ate it up, even if I did spend [a ton] more than I was going to). Down to the J Crew debossed notecards at their catalogue phone desk, where I can jot down my order number (no talls in the retail stores, unfortunately). I can name a dozen reasons why J Crew excels in the user experience, but I encourage you to check out their website and find out why yourself.

TheBabyWearer.com
I will be the first to admit this site is ugly and not intuitive. But despite the ugliness, thebabywearer.com has an absolutely thriving, cult-like user forum. Women interested in baby wearing spend hours, racking up hundreds, even thousands, of posts, discussing baby carriers and the joys of babywearing. Beyond product reviews and debates over the best carriers, there is an extremely active for sale or trade forum where mama's all over world sell to each other via pay pal accounts. What I love so much about this site is how involved and enthusiastic the members are, and how so much of the content is user generated. There was a very brief period where I was part of the cult, and this site dispelled any ideas I once had that social networking was either for the tech crowd or for kids. Anyone and everyone can find a place online to belong.

We're Still In the Early Stages of Social Media Marketing

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:58:00 +0000

I have been spending a lot of time getting familiar with social media concepts, and exploring how companies are using social media as part of their marketing strategies. I've come to the conclusion that while there is a lot of enthusiasm around social media and its potential, companies are still in the early stages of exploration. Though they have been around for years, blogs, RSS feeds and user forums seem to be the primary tools being used in the social media sphere. This is not a bad thing! It takes time to do these things right, as well as for users to start feeling the community love.

But I suspect the reason not to jump too far ahead is because many companies are not sure how to target, communicate, or measure strategies and tactics in other social media areas (some examples include Facebook, Gooruze, Satisfaction). Heck, many companies struggle to figure this out for their corporate websites, intranets, and now blogs, etc.

And while people are increasingly spending more time online, the younger generation is still the primary users of social media tools, encouraging the older generations to follow suit (see this report, by way of emergencemarkeing.com). Many companies with an older customer may find there is less urgency to move marketing dollars to social media campaigns.

Why You Don’t Want a Perfect Customer Satisfaction Score

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 20:03:00 +0000

I was recently introduced to the concept of 91. 91 is the theoretical score out of 100 that a business person would want from a customer satisfaction survey (10 points for 10 questions each). Why only 91? Why would you not want to exceed expectations on every facet of your business? Logically, you want 10 points out of 10 for every question, right?

Wrong, says the president of a major, global, industrial manufacturing company.* This person says the one question you want a 1 out of 10 on is about price. The question “Is our price competitive with your alternative suppliers?” or something of that nature, should garner your company a flunking score.

But if your customer satisfaction survey returns a 91, it means you are exceeding expectations everywhere else, and hopefully, that your customer prefers to use you to your competitors for the value you bring to the table. A score of 91 also means that your company is not leaving money on the table.

According to the McKinsey book, The Price Advantage, a 1% increase in pocket price (the price a company actually receives after all discounts) can result in an 11% increase in profits, which is more improved profitability than any cost reduction strategy, including reducing variable and/or fixed costs. Furthermore, if that 1% is justified, volume should not decrease. The moral of this story: pricing is critical to a profitable business. The right price may not be where your customers want it to be, but they will pay it if your product or service offers a value that exceeds the price tag.

*I heard this person speak in a Pricing class I am taking, and I'm not sure if he'd like his customers to know that he wants to make them cringe over the price!

You Get What You Pay For?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:11:00 +0000

You’ve heard the old adage “you get what you pay for,” but I’m not so sure that is true anymore. With the internet, product pricing is very transparent, highly accessible, and quick and easy to find. You can go to many product websites, review sites, or, if you're so inclined, to a brick and mortar store and get advice, guidance, recommendations on a product. At an physical store you can actually hold and test a product, see the actual size, etc. Then you can go back home, free of stress and sales people and crowds and search around for a bit to find the best price. In a couple minutes, you can have that product paid for and sent to your home. Now to the kitchen for a cookie!

So are you getting what you pay for? This used to mean that if something was a higher price, it was generally assumed to be better. But now, you just might have found a great deal. Maybe there is a site that had overstock of a product. Maybe a store is having a random Tuesday sale. Maybe you found your product selling at a discount rate for one day only on woot.com. Maybe you found it on ebay. Maybe, you emailed a variety of retailers what you were willing to pay for a product, and the one that got back to you first with an acceptance for that price got your business (I did that for my Kia minivan…a new 2006 cost our family less than a used 2005! Not that I like Kia, as I’ve come to find out, but that’s a different story).

This evolving pattern of consumer behavior has changed the way I view products. It used to be that I felt somewhat superior having a product that cost more than a competing product. With the proliferation of “retailers” carrying identical items, I have a harder time using product price to estimate value. The more personal, interactive, participatory behaviors of web 2.0 are shaping how we define worth, forcing companies to communicate brand in a proliferation of context driven ways. (Brian Oberkirch describes this as edgework, a fascinating concept which I am still trying wrap my head around.)

Banner Advertising on Social Networking Sites

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 02:59:00 +0000

After insulting the VP of a major banking firm, I decided to email her an unsolicited idea for her internet marketing strategy. Perfect timing, right?

Anyway, I had listened to this VP describe a campaign for a newly launched banking product, and felt there were better ways to utilize the banner advertising they had developed. Thus far, they had pretty poor click-thru on their banner ads, using them primarily on bankrate.com. Why the poor response? I don’t think it is because of the banner design, which I felt was pretty compelling and interesting. I think the ads were ineffective because internet users are becoming increasingly blind to on-line advertising.

Since I am fascinated by social media and how it is affecting consumer behavior, I think there are ways that companies can compromise between traditional methods of marketing and opportunities opening up in the web 2.0 environment. In the case of these banner ads, I thought that compromise could be between incentives (aka bribery) and referrals on social networking pages.

Here is the scenario:

New Banking Product is geared toward young, affluent, internet savvy consumers. It’s likely that they network with other young, affluent, internet savvy consumers. So, once this customer is approved via the product website (which is the only way it is available), the customer is thanked, then offered the opportunity to be entered into a drawing for a very cool tech gadget in exchange for posting a banner for the product on their Facebook/MySpace/blog, etc. They only had to post it for a short period (3 days, or so). The banner could even be modified to say something like “Check this out…I did.”

The banner is now in front of the demographic the bank is looking for, and is vouched for by the original customer. The banner becomes much more relevant, the bank is given the opportunity to strengthen the relationship with the customer, and the customer becomes a voice for the bank.

Obviously there are caveats. I have not discussed or even explored the technological requirements involved, the methods of ensuring compliance with X days posted on the site, or the advertising restrictions on networking sites in general. Also, it is obviously crucial to run this type of strategy through the company’s brand filter to ensure it makes sense with their business objectives and relationship strategies.

Still, I think it’s an interesting tactic. Social media is increasingly about participation between consumers and businesses, about conversations and experiences, and about indirect methods that grow (or aim to develop) positive brand attributes. This tactic is far from that personal dynamic, but I think it’s on the path.

So, how did this VP reply?

"We know we need to get into that space, but we're treading lightly, for not only budget reasons but we're a bank and there is fear in the hearts of our legal and compliance people!! Web 2.0 is all about getting other people to talk about you rather than us talking about us so we need to get there!"

Is Radiohead's Pricing Experiment a Sign of Things To Come?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:08:00 +0000

By now, the Radiohead set-your-own-price-for-their-CD event is old news in the blogging world. 1.2 downloads in the first week at roughly $8 a pop. I'm not even a Radiohead fan, but I am intrigued by their unorthodox pricing experiment, and what it means to the future of transaction pricing.

Presumably, Radiohead wanted to tap into the emerging social networking phenomena. Their fans are likely an Internet savvy, texting-obsessed, MySpace lovin' group. It just so happens that this demographic is comfortable "sharing" digital versions of music with each other, or would maybe pay only for a song or two. Radiohead (and their label*) likely hopes to find extra album sales from these folks who would otherwise not have shelled out for the entire compilation. Their willingness to enter into this type of transaction is a proclamation that they respect and trust their fan base. As a financial consideration, it is evidence they are confident in their brand equity and reputation.

This pricing strategy is especially uncommon because it has to do with intellectual property. Simple economics dictates that if an owner of intellectual property is not compensated for their contributions, there is lack of incentive for future innovation (aside from artists, think pharmaceuticals).

However, as an adoption strategy, the logic behind this type of pricing isn't new. For example, weight management (and social networking) website thedailyplate.com (TDP) is a community of over 100,000 people using TDP's free on-line food tracking software to track their caloric intake. Users have the option of paying a fee for some lite-weight bonus features. And devoted TDP users do, despite the fact that the bonus features are little more than the addition of some cute graphics and priority for service requests. But their is no requirement, no hassling, no annoying emails, no pressure whatsoever to contribute. Those that contribute have determined there is value in TDP, and want to see it succeed.

Many websites offer free services, and (like thedailyplate.com) get much of their revenues from advertising. But with online ads having questionable relevance and low click-thru rates, they may have to modify their business model to stay profitable. Has Radiohead shown us that if there is trust and respect between business and consumer, the goodwill will work both ways?

This is a level of participation and collaboration that is relatively rare. Web 2.0 principles are ushering in new behaviors between business and consumer. Beyond marketing and communication, traditional pricing for products and services may be challenged by this participation-driven phenomena. As an afterthought, I'm struck by the similarity between Radiohead's fans determining their album's value, and tipping a waiter or waitress for their service. Could the the future of payment be determined on value after the fact?

--

*Ammendement: According to The Week (11/9/2007) Radiohead released their album online with this pricing experiment without any help or guidance from their label. In fact, Radiohead frontman, Thom Yorke, says "...you have to ask yourself why anyone needs [a record label] anymore." The music industry's decaying business model is leading artists to explore new ways to distribute their work.

Keeping It Real

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 00:43:00 +0000

In my journey to learn more about the possibilities and the direction of the internet, I’ve come across a lot of blogs that talk about social media, social networks, social conversations, social media campaigns, social behaviors, etc. I am astounded by the sheer volume and depth of discussions about the topic. [But, of course, I am one of them, sort of.]

Anyway, I see posts like:

“…the scale of our social networks and connections, the velocity with which news and media travel and the impact this has on our relationships both 'offline' and online.” [read post]

and

"New types of web experiences are enabling people to go beyond just creating content; they’re allowing them to broadcast their personal context too. These “situational lifestreams” are a realtime flow of personal metadata, and it’s time to start thinking about how to design great experiences with them." [read post]

Pretty high-level smarty pants talk, right?

Then I read a post like Scalzi’s, How to Irritate and Annoy People in the Name of Blogging, and it gets me thinking. He has turned this fascinating world of intellectual blogging into something dirty. Well, to be fair, he thinks that many bloggers are simply “starfucking” to get more attention on their own blogs.

Truthfully, I loved this post. I “get” his angle. His words encourage me to write honesty and remind me that I have undertaken this blogging journey because I am passionate about learning.

But you know what? I eat this stuff up. Both the “starfuckery” speak (aka market speak) and the in your face talk. I think it is fascinating and I can’t get enough. I try to read as much as I can hopefully remember the good stuff.

True, I wouldn’t mind seeing less of words like buzz, change agent, and on-line/off-line, but keep the discussions coming.

Think Before You Speak

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 00:06:00 +0000

I recently told a vice president in charge of her company’s internet site that the design looked like information had been vomited onto the screen. Her eyes got wide and she said “Ohhhhh” in a very drawn out way. Luckily for me, the design was being phased out in favor of a new, more sophisticated one. One I liked. One I would not have so tactlessly insulted.

I wish I had better articulated my thoughts. What I should have said was that the new design gave priority to the various types of information on the page and that the color palette better segmented the different types of information. It was a more approachable, sticky design, compared to the original.

So the moral of this story is to think first and to articulate your thoughts in a way that can be taken for constructive criticism. Not rudeness.

PS - I later sent this VP an email with an apology and with the comments I really wanted to say. Thankfully, she replied that she took no offense at all, and that I should never apologize for being passionate about a topic. Very cool.