Investing in “Je Ne Sais Quoi” … It Pays To Be (Perceived as) Cool.

Check out this screengrab of the website of Rentokil Initial. I circled one of their news items. It is THEY who are announcing that they will be using a vendor’s product (in this case Google Apps). Often vendors fight just to even be allowed to mention that somebody is using their product… but when a customer perceives that an association with a vendor brings them something… even if it is a certain “je ne sais quoi” … that makes the vendor’s life a lot easier, more efficient… and makes marketing a lot cheaper. The implication is it’s worth investing in a little “je ne sais quoi”. It pays to be (perceived as) cool… or cutting edge.. or i don’t know, something!

Vendor's Dream

Tweet This Post

Google Ties it Together: Billboards That Change Daily, Twitter (Of Course) … Plus Paper and Thumbtacks

Here’s an ad/marketing campaign from Google worth studying. It’s for their Google Apps product. Apps, for those of you who haven’t tried it, are the web-based version (basically) of the ubiquitous Microsoft Office.*

I feel the messaging on the campaign that I’ve seen so far could be tighter, clearer. But it’s certainly OK. What’s is really smart about this campaign is that is  nicely integrated (fancy marketing speak for “tying various elements and media together”). It uses traditional billboards in strategic locations… but does something interesting with it to generate attention (the billboard will change every day for a month) …

… it leverages Twitter as a viral distribution platform

… plus (via this website) Google is attempting to leverage paper and thumbtacks as a viral distribution platform The site calls on converts to do “internal marketing” on their behalf with things like flyers for tacking up on cubicles. Here’s one:

The "spread the word" website allows converts to print these and paste 'em up

* Of course ubiquity is a fickle beast— my kids (a sample of the future population) use Google Apps (email, word processing, chat, etc.) almost exclusively for their school work. Although… my eldest son, who just got a netbook for his birthday, IS asking for PowerPoint on it.

Tweet This Post

Digital Threat #4: Shooting Yourself in the Foot

I gave a talk (link in Spanish) in Barcelona the other day in which one of my slides contained the following graphic.

My point was that while the digital era is bursting with opportunities (a number of which I outlined and which I will post here in video form once I get the files back), it’s also filled with THREATS. And that it’s quite possible to get f–ked by digital technology. I outlined three threats:

Threat #1:  There are so many more messages being put in front of customers now—and this is greatly accelerated by digital… so it’s just tougher, by the numbers, to be noticed.

Threat #2: Customers can get hold of a range of “tune-out” technologies so that they never even see your message.

Threat #3: Your competitors might well be getting savvy at leveraging digital to connect with customers … and as they get smarter and smarter at it, well you know where that leaves you

I just recently came across what you might call Threat #4: being kinda lame!

I’ve been loving the creative and competitive energy in the Mac vs. PC wars. Microsoft is really going for it with their strong Laptop Hunters campaign in which they ping Apple on price.

But here’s what I saw the other day when I tried to watch one of Microsoft’s ads online. Click the image for actual-size frustration.

I have a bit of sympathy for Microsoft. They have many competing goals … a number of which play out in this screenshot. One group wants you to buy PCs which means you buy more Microsoft Windows. Yet another group wants you to install their Silverlight software … so you must install it to see the ad. Then you have some third group that decides to conduct a survey on the site with another popup window!

The resultant experience is in NO WAY more than a sum of its parts.

Here are a couple of the videos in the Mac vs PC wars… you decide for yourself whether it’s worth the effort to watch the Microsoft ad: Lauren (Microsoft) vs. Megan (Apple).

BTW, some believe Microsoft shouldn’t be engaging Apple in this game at all. That they should stick to their software.

Tweet This Post

Ideas Worth Spreading — to 4.5B More People

The smart people who put on the TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) conference — but who actually are also becoming a very interesting digital media brand —  announced something interesting today. It is now possible to either translate yourself or view translations of any of the many interesting videos (AKA “Ted Talks”) at TED.com. The idea: make the talks useful to the 4.5 billion or so people who don’t speak English. To quote head-TED Chris Anderson:

The TED Open Translation Project will enable thousands of volunteer translators to use subtitles to make TED available to their own communities. To do this the right way has taken a year of preparation. But now we’re ready.

The site is filling up with  what they call “interactive transcripts”. They allow you to click on any word in English or a translated language — and actually make the video of the given talk play from that word on.

This is all very good for making the site and videos people-friendly to many more people. But it’s also very good for TED.com’s search engine friendliness… talks are searchable and findable, increasing the site’s profile on Google and other engines.

BTW, here, per TED, are the languages with the most talks translated in them, as of this posting.

Source: TED.com

Smart. Or, if you like, inteligente, интелигентен, 智能, חָכָם, لبيب, วิทูร

Tweet This Post

Hey, That’s Not Me

Here’s a nice example of a website doing something different to achieve their goals. Mixx is a news/info/photo/link  sharing site. Like most sites they know they will get better results if people SEE THEMSELVES in the site and if their friends and colleagues see them too.People are more likely to use the site, link to and from the site etc.. 

Most websites today that ask one to register and upload a photo are pretty humdrum in their appeal. They have a generic photo if you don’t upload your own, they might have a little bar telling you what percentage of your profile you’ve filled out, etc.

Mixx is mixing it up. Here’s how they’re gently encouraging me to fill out my profile. A smart underdog move.

Tweet This Post

Editing Engineers

I had a frustrating meeting the other day with a very engineery startup. They are making some of the coolest stuff I have seen in a while. I just couldn’t convince them they need an editor to help make their technology more understandable… accessible… market-friendly.

I won’t say who they were… but I do run into this a lot. The way many companies describe themselves makes it really tough to go from seeing how cool their stuff is to figuring out what problems it will solve. Mostly because the examples they give are so incredibly technical and theoretical. Editing the examples will make a huge difference.

Sometimes it reminds me of my first job after college. I was a reporter for a community newspaper. I had an actual editor who taught me a lot. But perhaps my most important editor was the guy who ran IT. He was transitioning several newsrooms from an ancient publishing system to a new one using PCs and standard desktop publishing software. Because I had worked during college in the desktop publishing department at a Copymat (helping people format their resumes etc.) the IT head recruited me to help sell his new system internally. He asked me to create examples of the graphics that were possible with the software for a presentation he was to give to the board of directors. I excitedly created a slew of squiggly lines and shapes and patterns. No go. The IT head said “nice squiggly lines, but this will have no relevance to the board.. we need to show clear examples of how the technology can save the company money, make the company more nimble and efficient…” I was geeking out.

The IT guy (an engineer, BTW) was editing me.

One ironic thing about my recent frustrating meeting is that the CEO is a huge (gushing!) Apple fan. A fan of their technology.  He seems to miss that they are a great company ALSO because they are brilliant communicators.  Look at the picture of the Mac at the top of this post. An engineering-only company might have written what engineers are trained to write when they create a new program: “hello world”

Somebody edited the engineer.

Removing one word made the computer friendly, human, approachable.

BTW… here’s another post about how important one word can be. It also happens to be about Apple. And if you’re into the idea of editing, here are a couple more posts: Where Blood Tasted of Blood and Honey of Honey and Less is More.

Tweet This Post

Booktips: “The Art of Letting Go, Enterprise 2.0″

I have been checking out a really interesting/smart book called The Art of Letting Go, Enterprise 2.0.  The book is a series of essays by people like Stefan Bocking, who runs webs services at Vodafone, Gotz Hamman, business editor for the big German weekly Die ZEIT, Andrew McAfee, a professor in tech and ops management at Harvard biz school. The essays address ways web 2.0 technologies (many of which are communications technologies which is one reason I’m so interested in them) can be used as business tools.

Enterprise 2.0 – The Art of Letting Go

Here’s one bit that caught my eye.. I’ll quote directly from McAfee’s essay called “A Definition of Enterprise 2.0″

One of the most common phrases I hear in discussions of any type of IT initiative …. is “It’s not about the technology (INATT).” I’ve heard this from vendors, consultants, technologists, executives … analysts, pundits and academics ….

People usually mean one of two things when they say INATT; one of them is correct but somewhat uninformative, and the other conveys a lot of information but is incorrect and even dangerous. The correct-but-bland meaning  is “It’s not about the technology alone.” In other words, a piece of technology will not spontaneously or independently start delivering value, generating benefits, and doing precisely what it’s deployers want it to do. Technologies have to be managed in order to do any of these things; they’re not magic bullets or miracle cures.

….

The other meaning behind INATT is “The details of this technology can be ignored for the purposes of this discussion.”

As somebody who has seen many  times how the details of anything — including, and often especially, technology — is experienced by users/customers can have huge impact, I think McAfee is right on! in saying how wrong this second point is.

But I disagree that the first point is bland and does not bear repeating early and often — even if people seem to get it. Communication is aided by technology… but it really (really, really, always) is about people.  I am going to start using the acronym myself… but I am going to add a letter to really make the point: INATTA (the second A being “Alone”).

My little note isn’t nearly as smart as many of the points in McAfee’s essay and in the book in general. Check the book out for yourself.

Thanks to Tina Kulow for the booktip.

Oh, BTW, the book as a website.

Tweet This Post

The Swimmer and the Water Pipe

The photo ran in News of the World

Michael Phelps is apologizing for appearing in a photo a few months ago with a bong. The apology feels fake… like his mom did his homework for him.

“I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment. I’m 23 years old, and despite the successes I have had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner that people have come to expect from me. For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public — it will not happen again.”

It feels like this was a hastily thrown together response. Audiences can handle (and want) something more nuanced and interesting and honest than this. It’s “boardroom fear” that causes this sort of thing to be “wordsmithed” and said. I know it’s tough when so much money is at stake in the short term, but long-term brands need to have more soul than this.

This episode reminds me of the scene in the documentary “Shutup and Sing” when the Dixie Chicks return home from the UK after Natalie Maines made her comments about George W. Bush and Texas — and the band sits around a table with a consultant for one of their major endorsers. It was an awkward scene. The band, ultimately, chose to go in an open, honest and VERY soulful direction. And the film itself (which chronicles this very struggle about being famous and human, independent and not) became a great communications piece for the band.  Do check it out if you haven’t.

One really nice thing (and smart move) is that Phelps’ statement was made on his Facebook page (where he has just shy of two million fans).. and the 714 comments (so far) are very human in their response.

Humans give brands a soul. In the case of inanimate brands (like, say, a cereal, for example) the humans are the managers and the creative people they hire — and the customers who respond to the brand. It’s no different with brands that are actually people (like, say, a swimmer, for example). With this apology, it seems, the managers are trying to keep the Phelps brand soulless. His audience is giving it soul — per the Facebook comments.

It will be interesting, and nice, to hear from the swimmer himself at some point.

This isn’t a case of Shutup and Swim. This kid should be seen AND heard.

Tweet This Post