Tuesday, November 3, 2009

The People in the Room

Crowdsourcing at the Highest Level

I recently made a career change, joining Fleishman Hillard in their Chicago office as a Digital Strategist, primarily working on B2B accounts. As chance would have it, the company-wide FH Digital group was holding a Digital Leadership conference in Washington DC shortly after my last day with ARENDS, wherein they assembled as many of their best and brightest Digerati for a meeting of the minds. Through sheer dint of fortuitous timing, with a little on-the-fly schedule adjustment, I was able to attend this conference on my very first day on the job.

It was literally a global event, with attendees from Milan, London, Toronto, and Hong Kong as well as a number of other US cities and the large digital hubs in Washington DC and St. Louis. I found it simultaneously exhilarating and bewildering to be thrust deep into this community without much preamble or preparation. On the one hand, it was a tremendously valuable exposure to this deep and multifaceted network. An office like Chicago can tap into many resources across the world, with specialist skills available for any tactical or strategic need. Case study after case study was presented demonstrating the breadth of capabilities we can offer clients. It was great to meet these team members, and to be able to have a face with which to attach a name as we interact in the future.

On the other hand, there was a good deal of discussion relating to policies, processes, and procedures to which I was unable to add much (given my relative unfamiliarity with the agency). Even this was instructional, of course, exposing me to nuanced discussion of how things really work in an agency this large. It was especially illuminating to see so many brilliant minds, literally at the peak of their profession, bending to the topics at hand.

In fact, the leadership of FH Digital were quite open about tapping this talent mass to help solve (or at least inform) the challenges facing the practice. There were many exercises specifically designed to elicit quality input on business problems, such as how to market ourselves and how to describe the value we represent to our clients. These are things that traditionally come down from management on high; in this case, we were helping build them from the ground up.

Which struck me as being both obvious and inspired. The concept of crowdsourcing is pretty well-established at this point in the interactive space. Wikipedia is the most obvious example, but others abound. The entire Open Source software movement, for example, is based around the idea of presenting a concept to a talented and capable group, and having them dive into it and bang it around so that changes will be found to improve and expand on the original idea. Similarly, some web sites have sprung up that facilitate the outsourcing of graphics projects. Members of these networks review online requirements for a particular need, such as a logo or an illustration, with a posted budget. If the members choose to participate, they submit designs that they develop on spec with the hopes of winning the project. They are then paid the posted price for their work. Most people agree this process is less effective for complex creative projects, but it is a good way of leveraging the web to expand on the traditional creative process of submitting three options for the client to choose one.

However, I am not sure how many companies utilize the strength of their own people in a similar way to approach the challenges of business operation. Collaboration is encouraged and supported in many, of course, or at least in theory. Large manufacturing technology companies will use intranets to facilitate sharing of ideas and information between design engineers, for example, and the growth of blogs and wikis as tools for feedback and data-gathering is certainly part of this. But these are all based around support for the effort of the individual member to address his or her individual problem; for a company to use the collective abilities of its own people to work on corporate challenges is a little more unique and maybe even visionary.

It’s not hard to hypothesize why corporate leadership might not leap to the concept of using its own workforce to advise on strategic or even tactical challenges. Leaders are supposed to lead, after all. In any industry, the managers are charged with the planning and vision to direct the company in all areas. The worker bees, no matter how sophisticated their abilities or extensive their training or how broad their experience, are the ones who have to actually do the work. It is difficult to imagine that management of any company would willingly cede their authority and control to labor.

But it makes enormous sense to realize that the ones “in the trenches” have a depth of practical knowledge that can be keenly valuable in planning and strategy. And if one has the capability of mining information from each of thousands of persons who do a particular professional task every day, and do it very well, then the sheer aggregate of data will likely produce insight that can point to solutions. Statistically the crazy or poorly considered ideas will be minimized and can be ignored, but any broadly-suggested concept represents the collective wisdom and would merit support. A smart researcher can devise poll questions or other methods that will produce optimal results; technology is available that can make it very easy, and very rewarding, for subjects to participate.

While the FH Digital gathering was limited to the people in the room, and the data collection was not rigorous in methodology (admittedly, according to the FH Digital Research Group which was well-represented), it still revealed the value of approaching an executional work force (in this case dedicated to interactive communication strategy and tactics on behalf of clients) for input on organizational challenges. The feedback received by our leadership will go a long way toward crafting worthwhile strategy effective tactics that represent real-world conditions.

A common trope is to talk about the “smartest people in the room;” if you have a situation where everybody in the room is smart, then it is a smart idea to tap into that talent, especially if the “room” can be metaphorically extended across your company. That’s crowdsourcing taken to a higher level.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Display Ads, Whither to Wither?

According to the "Natural Born Clickers" study (released recently by ComScore and media agency Starcom), the number of people online who click display ads has dropped 50% in less than two years. They conducted a similar study in 2007 which found that 32% of the respondents affirmed they clicked on banner ads; now, two years later, the figure is down to 16%.

Ad Age, in their article discussing the study, leaps to the question of whether Click-Thru-Rate is the proper metric for online display advertising. They report ComScore as determining, through "client studies," that banners generate significant lift in brand-site visitation, trademark search, and both online and offline sales among those exposed to the ads.

I have to confess to skepticism about this. I'd have to see those "client studies" to determine their scientific rigor.

While I believe in the importance of branding, and I am willing to admit that display ads might be able to help lift a brand's awareness or mindset penetration, I doubt very seriously that really accurate data can be identified to prove this. We in the interactive marketing space like to tout metrics as a core part of the web's value, but in the case of display ads, the most obvious or intuitive metric (clicks) are usually SO LOW as to be worthless as a way to make money. I sure wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for at best a 0.4% CTR...so it behooves publishers to try and justify, however possible, this revenue-generation method with which they are stuck.

The paradigm needs to continue to shift and we need to continue to innovate. A reader identified as "ivak99" makes a very good response to the Ad Age article in which he points out that internet users are "active" while banner presentation, like TV commercials, are intended for a "passive" viewer. Marketers need to leverage the strengths of the medium and craft content, as well as traffic-generation methods, that DO work on the web. Banner ads really don't and we should not be wasting money on them when we can innovate and figure out new and exciting ways to get our customers the stuff they need, and when they need it.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Don't Believe the Hype

"Social marketing is a shiny new toy and almost everyone is wising up and getting involved, as they should...There's no question that social applications are becoming central to our online lives, and soon social apps will be a central part of the very operating systems we use...Still, at the heart of it all for marketers is the message. Never forget that these new social technologies are just new ways to communicate. And technology by itself is not persuasive. Beware not to get the media mixed up with the message...Every status update, tweet, and inbox message is nothing more than a communication between a sender and a reader. What you say and how you say it matters."

I love Bryan Eisenberg. He almost always hits the proverbial nail right on the head, and in this case his words ring truer than ever over the buzz around Social Media.

From the earliest days of technology-aided communication, the temptation of the new has always been the demon of the effective, or at least of the cost-effective. Many of us remember the client refrain from the early days of Web 1.0: "We just need a web site!" In other words, we haven't thought at all about what to put in the web site, or how it can help us, we just want one because everybody is getting one. It is the classic case of substituting the tool for the finished object, and that is what Social Media is--a tool, and only a tool, for communicating. Just having a Twitter account means nothing, you have to use the tool in the proper way and most important you have to create good and appropriate content for that tool.

Please don't get caught up in the hype. Think carefully about how you would use Social Media applications to further your business objectives, how you can properly support it, and whether your target audiences will utilize your Social Media presence in a way that furthers your goals. If not, don't bother. Use the money and time you might otherwise put into it for channels and initiatives that will help you achieve your success metrics.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Do You Have Personal-IT-e?

Kevin Gibbons on Search Engine Land has a good overview of “Building Your Personal Brand” (http://searchengineland.com/seo-tips-for-building-your-personal-brand-21380)

In any arena where business decisions are influenced by the concept of expertise, then the demonstrated ability of the individual involved has distinct value. On an agency basis, this has traditionally been demonstrated by examples of work created as well as a listing of clients—the implication being that impressive clients would only work with high-quality partners. The other implication is that the ability demonstrated by a case study or a portfolio can be considered to translate across the agency. The individuals involved in a successful campaign are rarely spotlighted as distinct people; after all, in the fluid world of marketing, individuals may move on and their value to the organization drops to nil—and becomes a liability, since they are likely now a competitor.

For the people who created that campaign, however, the ability to demonstrate distinct and attributable skills is extremely important to their future livelihood. One has to have a portfolio or list of work examples to be considered for future employment. This is the most tangible way we have to show our capabilities—this is what I have done, so you may extrapolate what I can do.

But the modern interactive age allows much more demonstration than a resume or a portfolio. The pervasive web of social media allows a plethora of inexpensive channels through which we all can interact with the world and provide a potential audience with our clever thoughts and valuable insight into our profession. The concept of a personal brand becomes much more vibrant and important because one can finally (and easily) show our stuff to the world, without making a million cold calls.

So my insight for today is to all of us who want to make a living through our creative thinking and effective problem solving: show us what you can do.




The article includes this handy graphic, originally created by Gary Hays and Laurel Papworth, that really illustrates the web of interaction involved in developing your personal brand in the interactive space (http://www.flickr.com/photos/garyhayes/2973684461/).
I think we all need to start a blog, post things to Flickr or SlideShare or YouTube, and put our random (but valuable) thoughts out via Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. It doesn’t really matter whether or not anybody is listening every day; it only matters when that potential client or possible employer goes looking for you. Then they will see what you have done, and hopefully, they will find it meet and good. Otherwise they won’t know whether or not to even give you a call.

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Pigs Fly

That's the joke, isn't it? The Cubs are going to win the World Series (or some other astronomically unlikely occurrence is going to take place) now, because "swine flu."

Well, not to take away from the current pandemic panic, we have a different virus to propagate. It is slightly cheesy to pitch one's own work in one's blog, imho, but I will do it anyway. We have launched a viral campaign in the B2B space, which is unusual enough, but I also think it's kind of funny and will hopefully be effective in getting attention for our client Siemens.

So check out either www.youtube.com/darkcover09 or the core gateway web site www.crackthegcode.com to see what's going on. If you deal with machine tools or the CNC control industry, you may even get a quick chuckle...

Monday, May 4, 2009

It's the End of the World as We Know It

…and I Feel Fine

(with apologies to REM)

Sean Carton recently wrote a very interesting column on ClickZ entitled “The End of Ad Agencies as We Know Them.” (http://www.clickz.com/3633372) He posits that a confluence of shifting forces have created a new world in which the “full-service monolithic agency model” is no longer effective and will likely die away.

  • The Internet has changed how consumers are willing to receive information about products and services; instead of an “interrupt” model where channels are limited and attention has to be grabbed within a narrow set of viewing options, the consumer is now in charge and has a nearly infinite range of choices for viewing and receiving information
  • Because of that, traditional media (broadcast television and newspaper/periodical readership, specifically) is experiencing monumental audience loss and a corresponding plummet in advertising revenue
  • The economic downturn has exacerbated job loss in the advertising industry, releasing thousands of talented professionals into the market who often establish themselves as freelancers or independent contractors within their particular specialties. This has significantly improved the freelance pool and has made it relatively easy to find a qualified resource when one needs it for a particular project or program.


Agencies will need to remake themselves in a new image to cope with, and survive, these forces. Carton has an idea as to how that might work:


"So what's the agency of the future going to look like? Probably a lot smaller and focused on strategy, account/project management, creative leadership (but not execution), and media strategy (but not planning and buying). Most agencies will revolve around these hubs if they're honest with themselves. Agencies will exist to provide high-level strategic guidance that clients need in a media-chaotic environment. Agencies will expand or contract as needed or will explore radical solutions such as crowdsourcing to get work done for less money."

Historically, the B2B space has been smaller in scale than the monolithic full-service model as described by Carton, but the description is still applicable. Choices have been few on the business side, with media typically limited to trade publications and trade show sponsorship. Marketing consisted of making brochures or direct mail pieces, for the most part, or sponsoring educational outreach efforts that were necessarily limited in effect.

Now the options have exploded with the growth of the internet. Email marketing is now much more cost-effective and arguably more precise than printed mailers; web sites can be updated regularly and fresh information made available much more quickly and cheaply than a brochure redesign/print/mailing.

Coming from the interactive sphere, I have no reason to weep if this particular vision of Rome burning comes true. The key characteristics of interactive marketing are in direct contrast to those of traditional advertising.

Good interactive communications:

  • Are crafted to receive interested visitors rather than reach out to grab attention
  • Speak well to niche audiences as opposed to appealing to the lowest common denominator (and can speak directly to ALL audiences individually, there is no limit on the quantity or type of content that can be made available)
  • Are measurable and can be tied to specific success metrics, vs. broadly distributed and only vaguely associated with quantifiable results


The challenge remains to develop a new agency model that can adapt to the realities of this new world and continue to properly service clients as well as be profitable. The value we bring as professional marketers will evolve from the “big idea” to more of a content-based approach, especially in these economic times where client staff has typically been reduced to skeleton levels. We will be integrated into not just the marketing of the client but the sales process as well. An agency of the future will:

  • Staff core skills and abilities (like strategy, industry knowledge, creative direction, account relationship) but bring in freelance or independent resources for tactical execution needs (design, web programming, project coordination, media buying)
  • Be a key partner to clients in developing content for use across all channels; this means becoming an expert in the client’s business and being able to step in and generate anything from press releases to web page content to technical white papers, at least in initial form. More importantly, the agency will need to be able to aggregate raw content from the client and refine to appropriate delivery format depending on the tactical need. Content management will be a key service in the future agency-client relationship.
  • Build metrics and analysis into all client work; ROI calculations need to be considered for every engagement. Even broader-scope communications like TV or radio advertising are going to be tied into an interactive component, and agencies must be very sophisticated in how they track results that will cross several media channels and impact brand engagement over time. Clients will expect this as they themselves become more concerned with cost control and managing tighter budgets.
  • Have a tight estimating and proposing process, which will then result in a tight project management process. Agencies need to know their actual costs for prospective projects, and make sure they know what they are providing for any retainer fee structure. Clients will pay for good talent, but measurable return is the benchmark of the future.


So it may be the beginning of the end, but smart marketers know that an end of an era marks the dawn of a new one, and if we play it properly we will emerge stronger from the cataclysm and succeed where others will fall away.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Towards a General Theory of Web Site Relativity

I have been grappling with a way to distill the essence of web site marketing into a structure or presentation that can instantly and easily be comprehended by potential clients. In my more grandiose moments, I feel like Newton or Einstein trying to craft a new language to describe things that seem so evident but remain so hard to crystallize. Fortunately, my co-workers and family members are quick and thorough in deflating my grandiosity before my head swells to dangerous proportions. Nevertheless, I feel moved to expound a bit on the essence of communicating via the interactive channel, and specifically what we are talking about when we talk about the web site.

Essentially, this is what we want to do when we craft a web site:
ATTRACT --> ENGAGE --> MEASURE --> ADVANCE

Please note the use of arrows, implying motion. One might envision a circular illustration depicting the cyclical nature of this process. That’s a core element of my theory, that a web site is not an object but in truth a process that involves not only creation of engaging content objects but also developing ways of bringing in users, measuring patterns of their interaction with the site, and iterative improvements designed to maximize both successful audience generation and effective user engagement.

Too often a client tends to envision a web site as an object, perhaps a library or maybe the snake curled around the globe, swallowing his own tail. In fact, in the modern web world, we cannot afford to think in terms of communicative content only (no matter how dynamic it might be). We must think holistically about how our users engage the web (and the world as a whole) to make sure that we have an effective interaction with them.


ATTRACT: to draw by appealing to the emotions or senses, by stimulating interest, or by exciting admiration
Most people first think about a web site in terms of the site itself: content, structure, functionality, domain name. But in reality the first step is to envision who we want to experience the site, which leads to an examination of how they might find it. Search Engine Optimization of the site’s content is only the starting point. A key phrase strategy must be a core part of any modern web site content plan. That concept extends beyond the site copy. We need to make sure that videos are also uploaded to YouTube with appropriate key phrase tags and clear linkage back to the site. Social media tagging for site content must be easy and comprehensive, as well as the ability to forward to a friend. Linkback and blogger support must be considered.

In short, the site itself must be as friendly as possible to all of the ways in which our preferred influencers, aggregators, and editors might encounter it.

ENGAGE: to attract and hold fast
Needless to say, once a visitor comes to the site, we want to maximize his/her experience. But it is keenly important to realize that does not always mean keeping the person on the site. Especially in the B2B space, sometimes the most effective interactions are the quickest: user is looking for something specific, s/he finds it, and they are done. Success is not measured through time on site (in fact, that might more often indicate failure.)

In general, though, content is king and the more compelling and useful content one can provide, the better. A content strategy must be based around a deep understanding of the target audience and what they will want or need from the web site. In B2B, this often means a clear definition of the Buying Cycle and the stages the customer must pass through before they are ready to purchase. Content has to be mapped to support each stage, and for each classification of potential site user—decider, influencer, researcher.

Finally, the call to action must be crystal clear and immediately available at all times. In B2B that usually involves contact, but it might involve an online sale or some other success metric that means we have achieved a business objective.

MEASURE: to estimate the relative amount, value, etc., of, by comparison with some standard
We have attraction and we have engagement, but are we getting the result we want? Are the visitors doing what we thought they would? How do we know if we have wisely spent our web-development $? Or have we wasted it all?

Web analytics seems like a basic sort of tenet yet I am consistently amazed at how many clients do not pay attention to site statistics. One must identify Key Performance Indicators that can be used to gauge activity on the site.

It is almost worse than ignoring analytics when customers pay attention to stats that ultimately have no meaning. As mentioned above, things like Time on Site can be worthless barometers of success. Even a large quantity of site visits or numbers of pages viewed can mean nothing if few users do what we’d hoped they would do.

We must construct the site in such a way as to be able to determine whether or not we are achieving our goals by statistical analysis. Data that documents this is called the Success Metric, and when a user completes our objective we call it a Conversion. It can be a direct-to-the-bottom-line sort of parameter, such as quantity of sales for an e-commerce site, or indirect as in a lead generated (for most B2B sites), to as ephemeral as visitors following a designated content path to get exposure to a particular set of information pieces. It is up to us to decide our success metrics when we design the site. And then, we must build the site to suit our needs.

Measurement is an ongoing process. Unless you are in the midst of a particular campaign with a particular calendar, you will want to regularly measure your Key Performance Indicators. The definition above indicates one needs a standard for comparison, and regular review allows that. One can see user behavior before and after an implementation; and of course averages over time give the best indication of trending and allow some estimation for the future.

ADVANCE: to improve or make progress
Finally, the real purpose of all of the measurement is to determine whether or not you could do it better. Take the data you have gathered, make some conclusions (or at least develop some hypotheses), and make changes to see if you can improve. Testing is a key to this; keep track of before and after data, and make sure you are scientific in your efforts. A/B testing is simplest, but multivariate testing is also very valuable. A book like Tim Ash’s Landing Page Optimization (http://landingpageoptimizationbook.com/) spells out the process very well.

The main idea is that one must keep moving forward, even as the process cycles back around to generating more traffic. Whether your web site moves on a seasonal basis, or can be rotated through a regular monthly cycle, or whether other market forces shape the ebb and flow of your universe, you need to keep refreshing at each stage in order to maximize your return on investment and achieve the greatest success. In order to attract new visitors, keep generating fresh and relevant content within your communication plan. When you have traffic on the site, measure to see if your goals are being achieved and whether you can learn anything helpful from the data. And then use that information to make changes that can improve the whole process, and begin the cycle anew. Thus my General Theory of Web Site Relativity.

Ow! Like Newton, I just got hit on the head by an apple, but I think it was thrown by our VP of Strategy…