Biznology Blog: September 2007

« August 2007 | Main | October 2007 »

September 28, 2007

Search Marketing is a Hot Topic

It was fun speaking to the American Marketing Association in Boston today as part of their Hot Topics series. It was an honor being part of an agenda featuring Stephan Spencer, Alan-Rimm Kaufman, Neil Patel, Eric Ward, and others. My slides are posted here for Search by the Numbers.

Posted by mikemoran at 11:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 27, 2007

Interview with Stephan Spencer

Earlier this week, I spoke with Stephan Spencer about search marketing, especially involving the problems you face in a large organization trying to improve your search results. For those who don't know, Stephan leads NetConcepts, a leading search marketing consultancy, and is the driving force behind the AMA Hot Topics series on search, where I will be appearing with him tomorrow in Boston and on November 2 in Chicago. Stephan posted several different summaries of our talk here and here and here. (He's a busy guy.) And he posted the entire podcast here. I hope it's helpful to you.

Posted by mikemoran at 7:18 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 26, 2007

How many times must I apologize?

My Web host has been having major problems, so my blog has been down since last Thursday. Here is the post that I planned for Friday—I hope to be back on my daily schedule now. It was kind of wierd to be unable to publish for a few days. It's nice to be back in the saddle. Here goes.

When you speak to enough groups, you always get questions that you've never been asked before. Last Thursday, I was lucky to be able to address 50 public relations professionals from Intel, the chip-making giant, and got a great question: "How many times, and in how many places, must I apologize?"

The question was provoked by several points I made in my talk. I emphasized how the Web is forcing companies to drop their corporate diginity and become more human. I implored them to dump their hopes that by not responding, the ugly story will go away—today, not responding merely seems to fan the flames among bloggers, for example. And I let them know that the best way to build a relationship with customers to admit you screwed up when you, in fact, did.

They got it. I am sure that they didn't feel entirely compfortable with the idea—no one does—but they understand that avoiding that uncoimfortable conversation is becoming riskier to your brand image than engaging in tough dialogues.

But what is the answer to the question? How many time should you apologize? Should you just issue a press release fessing up and leave it at that? Do you pick the most public place where you were called out?

I say no.

I say that you should apologize any place it seems appropriate. Every place it seems appropriate. Wherever someone sounds agrieved, jump in and say you are sorry and say what you intend to do to make things better and to avoid it happening again.

Well, I could tell from the looks on their faces that I did not give the "right" answer. What I am suggesting is, in fact, impossible, right? How can a single PR person responsible for an issue answer dozens, hundreds, or maybe even thousands of complaints on that issue, all scattered across the nooks and crannies of the Web?

It's obvious that a single PR person can't do that. Sure, you could marshall the resources of multiple PR people in a crisis, but only big companies can do that. What's the real secret to responding to these far-flung and numerous Web complaints?

The secret is the rest of your employees.

The era of the "Lone Ranger" PR person is over. (I'm not sure why we Americans use the Lone Ranger to signify someone working alone, because he had Tonto at his side, but cut me some slack here.) The new role of a PR person is to help the rest of the company do PR too. Get the rest of your company involved in the various Web communities that are important to your company. Long before the crisis.

Help everyone in your company understand that each of them is an officially deputized PR person. Teach them how to operate in public—even if "in public" for them just means participating in a message board. Make sure they understand what they should say and what they shouldn't. In a crisis, coach them on how to handle it.

Above all, teach them to give back to the community they serve. Help them gain fans in that community so that when a crisis does occur, they'll have built up enough goodwill that people will listen to them. You'll probably find that other people defend your company or at least defend your employee just because of that goodwill built up over months or years.

And when those connected employees answer a hot issue, they'll be listened to far more closely than a faceless PR stranger ever would be.

Is it risky to empower your employees to speak for your company in public? Yes. The only thing riskier, however, is preventing them from doing it.

Posted by mikemoran at 9:15 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 20, 2007

So, what's a good privacy policy?

I wrote a few days ago about privacy policies and got several people asking, "So who has a good privacy policy? Well, lots of companies have good privacy policies, but I think what people really want to know is "Who has made their privacy policy a marketing asset?" That narrows the field considerably.

I had a few companies in my head that I thought were contenders, but I am not sure if my standards have gotten tougher or the policies have changed, but I didn't find any on my own that seemed to transcend good to being a real asset.

So I decided to get help—I went to the Electronic Frontier Foiundation's Web site to see whether they made any recommendations, and found this endorsement of BillMonk's privacy policy.

I had heard of BillMonk, but I haven't used it, so I certainly had never looked at its privacy policy. As I look it over, it does seem like a real marketing asset. It addresses privacy from the customer's point of view. It uses very clear language. It highlights the most important points. And it left me feeling like they really do care about their customers' privacy.

That is a message that strengthns brand image. Imagine a privacy policy that gets people to like your company. Do you have one?

Posted by mikemoran at 1:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 19, 2007

A book is born

Today is the big day that Amazon takes down the "preorder" sign and starts accepting regular orders for my new book. It's not exactly Harry Potter, but I wanted to take one day to celebrate the birth of a new book. It takes a long time to write and I always need a lot of help from my wife and lots of other folks to finally get it into print. I hope you like it, and I must admit that I have been very excited about the response of folks who get to read it ahead of time. You can read the praise for Do It Wrong Quickly yourself. Thanks in advance for those that order it.

Posted by mikemoran at 1:59 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 18, 2007

Procedures

Sometimes I ask marketers about what processes they use and it's a good test to see who works in a big company and who works in a small one. Big company types either lament that their processes are hopelessly outdated or they list off exactly what they do with their chests puffed out in pride. Small company marketers roll their eyes and say that they don't need any processes and that "procedures" just weigh them down when they are trying to get work done. I think the word "procedure" is part of the problem.

Whenever I hear the word "procedure" I think of a surgeon trying to remove a body part (perhaps one that I am quite fond of). But do "processes" and "procedures" have to be that onerous? Do they have to be these painful things that require manuals and compliance officers and corporate governance?

I don't think so. (You thought I'd say yes?)

I think that we need to stop thinking about "procedures" and "processes" and start thinking about "checklists." They are really the same thing, but somehow "checklists" seem more nimble and lightweight—somehow more friendly and not so stultifying. You can still use your brain with a checklist instead of mindlessly following the procedure manual.

I think our attitude is what is important. Let's take a checklist attitude to execution so that we do things the best way we can think of and we do them consistently every time. Just don't call them procedures.

I am starting an experiment. I am going to post a few checklists to see if people find them useful (and to get feedback on how they could be improved). I've started with just one today, a checklist for sending marketing e-mail. Let me know what you think—I have ideas for a few more.

Posted by mikemoran at 4:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 17, 2007

Internet Marketing Blogroll

Some folks have been asking me what blogs I recommend for a while now. I know that everyone else has a blogroll—maybe that is one reason I have been resisting it. I'm not really a "do what everyone else does" person. But after thinking about it for a while, I've decided that I probably should do it. So I have created a (very short) page of blogs and other resources that I recommend. I've probably left someone out that I really should have included, but oh well. I expect to add to it over time, so if you have suggestions for me on other resources that I should recommend, please let me know. Anyway, here's my attempt at an Internet Marketing Blogroll.

Posted by mikemoran at 5:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 14, 2007

Privacy is the Best Policy

All the experts tell you to have a privacy policy, so I will tell you that, too. (Otherwise I have to turn in my expert union card.) But there are two problems I often see with privacy policies. Small companies often don't bother and big companies have them written by their lawyers. Between the two, people don't always get the information they need and they end up being mildly suspicious of what your company is doing.

Small companies often don't know how important privacy policies are. They are working hard just to have a Web site and they don't always spend time on the subtleties. I am not a company, small or otherwise, but I decided to have a privacy policy from the early days of my Web site. I don't think my policy is necessarily the greatest thing ever, but I at least tell people that I sometimes need information from them, that I will not disclose it, and that I monitor Web activity anonymously—and I tried to explain it in plain English.

Big companies sometimes don't speak in plain English because they pay lawyers too much to make it "correct" (skipping over making it understandable). They treat it like a contract rather than communication with a customer. I hate to single out companies and criticize them, because most of them are trying to do the right thing, but I think it's important to show examples of what not to do sometimes. If you take a look at the privacy policy of Office Depot (the office supplies retailer), you know from the beginning this was written by a lawyer.

"It is Office Depot's policy to respect and protect the privacy of our customers and the users of www.officedepot.com (hereinafter, the "Site"). Through this Privacy Statement, we want to reassure users of the Site that we will not sell, share, or rent user information to others in a manner different than as set forth in this Privacy Statement. By accessing this Site, you agree to be bound by the Privacy Statement. If you do not agree to the terms of this Privacy Statement, please do not use this Site. Each time you use the Site, the current version of the Privacy Statement will apply. Accordingly, when you use the Site, you should check the date of this Statement (which appears at the top) and review any changes since the last version."

Whew! Lotsa bold type they had to put in there to prove in court they really emphasized that part. And, just in case you weren't sure that this was straight from the legal department, pretty soon you come across a paragraph that looks like it should be read only after ripping off the shrink-wrap.

"Unfortunately, no data transmission over the Internet, or method of electronic storage, can be guaranteed to be 100% secure. As a result, while we strive to protect your information, we cannot guarantee its absolute security. IN NO EVENT SHALL OFFICE DEPOT BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE FORM OF ANY ACTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTIONS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE, COPYING, OR DISPLAY OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS SITE, EVEN IF OFFICE DEPOT OR AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF OFFICE DEPOT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES."

The bold type, the capital letters, and the overall impersonal tone of "this is our policy" (take it or leave it) does not convey a sensitivity to what customers are concerned about and just isn't very human or relational.

Now I am no lawyer (could you tell?), but I just don't think you need to talk this way to customers. As proof, I looked at several other office supply Web sites to see if their privacy policies looked like something you needed to notarize. They didn't. They managed to explain things without any sentences in all caps. Here is the beginning of my favorite one, OfficeMax's privacy policy.

"At OfficeMax, we recognize the sensitive nature of your personal and business information. For your protection, all information transmitted by you to us while visiting this website is secured using the latest technology in software encryption and security. OfficeMax provides this privacy policy in order to demonstrate our firm commitment to Internet privacy and to make you aware of our privacy practices, and of the choices you can make about the way your personal and business information is collected and used by OfficeMax."

Doesn't that convey a totally different tone? Now, OfficeMax's policy might still not be totally understandable to everyone (this stuff can be complicated), but they sure seem like they are trying to relate to their customers more than they are trying to avoid being sued by them.

Big companies don't have the luxury of always speaking in plain English, even in their privacy policies. But they can at least make an attempt. Happily, the trend is to more and more readable policies, and I applaud that.

But let's not think too harshly of Office Depot's legalese because at least they have a privacy policy. Many companies still don't. If Office Depot did not have a privacy policy, I wouldn't be able to excerpt it here and criticize it. So I want to at least give them credit for trying.

Does your company have a privacy policy? I don't care how small you are. And if you do, could your granny understand it? Remember that privacy policies are marketing, not just legal documents. What does your privacy policy convey about your brand image?

Posted by mikemoran at 8:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 13, 2007

Your first time

I've tried to avoid worthless posts plugging my new book (in favor of wothwhile posts plugging my new book) but I just got a copy of the finished bound book in the mail today and I was surprised at my reaction. When I finally held my first book in my hands back in 2005, I was elated. But not when I held this one.

I wasn't disappointed, but it sure didn't feel the same as the first time.

The first time, I just couldn't imagine beforehand what the book would be like—how large it would be, how it felt in your hands. I was even surprised it was so much thinner than my binder crammed with my manuscript. (Duh! It was printed on both side of the paper so it was half as thick.)

But this time, it was just what I expected, no more and no less. I am happy it is finally done (now the interviews and the appearances start) but I didn't have the same thrill of holding it in my hands for the first time. Neither did my family—my kids said, "That's great, dad" when they were clearly excited the first time.

I think this book is better than the first. And it is a business book, so the publisher is expecting higher sales. So I should be more excited about it. And I am excited about people reading it. But I didn't get excited as much by holding a copy. Holding a book you wrote is about the same every time. Next week I have planned to be excited about people starting to get it in their hands and read it. (I have marked my calendar for September 19 to be thrilled beyond words.)

This isn't bad. It's just human nature. It's never as exciting as the first time, no matter what it is. I think marketers forget this sometimes. We get all excited about what we are working on and we forget how hard it is to surprise a customer.

It happens even to great marketers. I really think Steve Jobs expected the headlines for their latest announcement to be about the new iPods but it was the $200 iPhone price cut that stole the headlines. Why did this happen? Because incremental improvements to the iPod are not as surprising as a one-third price cut for their hottest product.

As marketers, we need to remember how hard it is to surprise people. We need to focus on doing so (to be remarkable as Seth Godin likes to say) but to remember how difficult it is to really be remarkable just because you've done it before. I think that it is just as hard to surprise every time, no matter your track record.

Posted by mikemoran at 3:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 12, 2007

Do customer surveys really work?

I am behind reading my blogs and just caught up today with a great post from last week on grokdotcom that demonstrates how hard it is to get action-oriented information from customer surveys. Follow the link above to read the post—I'll wait right here.

Scary, isn't it? When you think about how many questions you've asked customers and how little information you might be getting back.

Surveys are seductive. They are easy to construct, easy to implement, they provide statistical data, and everyone understands exactly how they work. They are persuausive.

But the simple question that Bryan Eisenberg asked shows how flawed a survey can be.

Down deep, we all know that surveys are flawed, but we're accustomed to them. We are familar with them and we overlook the flaws because getting the information seems so important. And when you think about the fact that there is no perfect way to get information, your brain hurts.

When you think about how you need to watch customers use your product or your Web site, that you need to do interviews, mine your phone logs and support e-mail queue, track opinions in the blogosphere, and watch every mouse click on your Web site, geez, it's overwhelming.

We'd all rather retreat to our surveys. They are simple, we know how to do them, and everyone is so used to them that they don't question the results—we just point our business in whatever direction the survey says.

The problem is that they are often wrong, just like any single method of collecting customer feedback.

What about your business? Do you listen to what customers say out on the Web? Do you watch what they do? Or is your product development and marketing campaigns driven only by customer survey results?

Posted by mikemoran at 9:32 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 11, 2007

"But what else should I read?"

It's a question I get almost every day. People who have read my book want to know what else they can read. I have a list of books that I often recommend, but people asked to put it out on my Web site. It always felt like a lot of work to build reviews for each book, but my wife went ahead and built an Amazon store and filled it with my favorite books on Internet marketing, Web metrics, Web design, and more. So from now, on when someone asks me what else to read, I can send them to my Internet Marketing Bookstore. Let me know if you have books I did not list that you'd recommend.

Posted by mikemoran at 10:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 10, 2007

Automating Blog and Newsletter Delivery

If you struggle with how to reach your customers with e-mail newsletters and RSS feeds, you're not alone. I started out several years ago with a monthly e-mail newsletter and later added a blog that has built up to a daily posting. I've struggled with how to provide this information to subscribers without duplication using the delivery method that they want. Today, I will share what I am doing—it might help you think through your own content delivery strategy.

I'm cheap, so I started out using the list server mechanism that comes bundled with my Web hosting. It's kind of an ugly format, however, so it forced my customers to get newsletter excerpts in plain text.

And my wife and I had more work to do, originally writing a Perl script to allow folks to sign up, manually processing unsubscribes, and then having to figure what to do if something went wrong with the list server (like when we went on vacation last month and my service provider decided to upgrade the list server and sent out a cryptic message to every subscriber on the list.)

In the meantime, I also have this blog going. It seemed silly for the folks using RSS to subscribe to the blog not to see the newsletter, so I started posting blog entries each month pointing to the newsletter. But it also seemed silly to restrict the blog subscriptions to those that use feed readers—might not some newsletter subscribers want a daily e-mail instead of a monthly e-mail?

For a long time, I didn't know what to do, but I finally decided to use FeedBlitz to consolidate all my feed deliveries for e-mail and to offer all my newsletters as full-fledged blog entries. So, if you look at this blog post on my Web site, you'll find that you can subscribe either to the feed or to a daily e-mail, now powered by FeedBlitz.

I've been planning to do this for a few months, but finally got to it over the weekend. Today when I went to make the switchover, I noticed that on Friday FeedBlitz will begin incorporating ads into their e-mails, but I went ahead and switched anyway. I am hoping they are smart enough not to make the ads too intrusive, but if they do, I guess I will have to figure out what to do next. (I think I am doing e-mail wrong quickly...)

And I am shutting down the list server, too. Once a month, I will mark a blog entry as my monthly newsletter (I've established a newsletter category) and that entry will be shipped as e-mail to the subscribers of the monthly newsletter.

So daily blog subscribers can stick with their regular RSS feed or they can change to e-mail delivery if they prefer. Monthly newsletter subscribers can continue to get a monthly e-mail, or they can switch to a daily e-mail or RSS feed if they decide they want more.

I don't know if this will satisfy everyone, so let me know if you think I am missing something. And let me know if you have more questions on how I did this—if this kind of information is helpful to other marketers, that's even better.

Posted by mikemoran at 10:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 7, 2007

Virtual Events Return Real Value

Not long ago, I wrote about a new marketing opportunity from Unisfair in a piece I called Second Life Meets WebEx. The concept looked promising, but now Unisfair has contacted me with a preview of a study they comissioned to show the business value of their offering. The results are very interesting.

Before looking at the study results, we need to keep in mind that Unisfair has an obvious vested interest in showing studies that support what it is doing—they might not have tipped me off to a negative study. But the study, conducted by research and consulting firm The FactPoint Group based on 200 Unisfair events, fits with what I would have expected, because Unisfair's offering looks like a very promising way to reach target markets.

Trade shows and other in-person events make up the lion's share of many B2B marketing budgets, but the study shows why you might want to consider a virtual event. While costing a fraction of what live events do, they deliver nearly 350 qualified leads (on average) from events averaging over 1,500 attendees.

The news is not all good—about half the folks that register for virtual events do not show up when the time comes. This would be appalling for an in-person event, but the low cost and far greater capacity of virtual events makes this much less important. It's no different than how appalled we were when we found out how many people abandoned their online shopping carts. It's OK if huge numbers are no-shows as long as you get the return on your investment you need. Virtual events' low costs make that nearly a certainty.

If you haven't checked out how a virtual event can drive strong leads at a fraction of the cost, maybe this study will give you the impetus to check it out.

Posted by mikemoran at 3:06 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

September 6, 2007

Maximum Strength

I used a deodorant today (no, that isn't newsworthy) and noticed that it said that it is "Maximum Strength." I am not sure, but I think this product has also been called "improved" previously. It made me wonder, if it was already maximum strength, how can it be improved? Do people really listen to these claims anymore, or has the Web started to make us more discriminating consumers of all products?

It's not news that the Web has changed the way we make product claims and write copy. The breathless claims that punctuate TV and print advertising, or even direct marketing pieces, don't resonate with Web audiences. Instead of hype, people want facts. One person I interviewed for my new book said the traditional advice of "sell the benefits, not the features" is exactly the opposite of what you need to do on the Web.

So what becomes of all the products that are already at "maximum strength"? What can you say about a product when you have already used all the superlatives that you can? How do you move from hype to facts without making it seem like your product suddenly got worse?

I think the answer lies in specifics. The problem is not really the superlatives, such as "maximum strength," it's in what they mean. After all, that deodorant manufacturer doesn't have a "minimum strength" version. The problem is that these words are empty. Every manufacturer can say that their deodorant is "maximum strength" if it just means that it's the strongest protection they know how to make.

On the other hand, what kinds of problems can you solve with your deodorant. Of course, everyone can claim they stop odor and wetness (that's the way these folks seem to talk), but does anyone want a deodorant that doesn't leave streaks on their clothes? Or one that doesn't irritate tender skin? Or one that isn't noticeable when you are wearing a bathing suit?

Maybe these benefits are obvious, but I rarely see them discussed. The advertising for most deodorants sounds the same—you could use the same ads for several of the products. Men's deodorants are "tough" on perspiration (they never talk about sweat) and women's offer protection but gently. Sheesh!

Is your advertising all "maximum strength" with no unique benefits? Is it all vague claims with no specifics? Is it all sizzle and no steak? Think about what your customers really want to know and tell them. Think about what problems you can solve and explain how. Maybe it won't change your TV advertising, but the Web is the perfect place to have longer, more specific product claims. Are you taking advantage of this free way to differentiate your wares?

Posted by mikemoran at 9:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 5, 2007

Can a big company do it wrong quickly?

I'm back from vacation and I am overwhelmed at how many blog posts I must read every day—you really notice it when you try to read two weeks' worth of them at once. So, for the next few days, you might see me commenting on stuff written a while back. Today I came across a post from a few weeks back from Chris Anderson on how he handles the conflict between working for a big hit-oriented company and espousing The Long Tail.

Chris takes head on the notion that a large company can pursue the long tail and also the idea that companies must choose to go after hits or go after the long tail, but not both. As he points out, Conde Nast does both, and does both successfully.

Small companies can live off the long tail but large companies often must pursue hits also. Even examples of companies clearly benefiting from the long tail, such as Amazon, still rake in lots of revenue from hit products. Too often, we believe that big companies somehow are intrinsically different from small ones in every way, and we overlook that the changes brought about by the Internet affect all companies, albeit to different degrees and in different ways.

I also like the way Chris highlights failure in the post as something to be valued, because it reveals experimentation, And he correctly points out that we must distinguish between failure caused by sloppy execution rather then by experimentation. That is what "do it wrong quickly" is all about and it is every bit as important for large companies as for small ones.

Posted by mikemoran at 7:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 4, 2007

It Pays to Be a Skinflint Marketer

Marketers have usually had to spend money to be successful, but the advent of the Internet has changed the math. Today, even skinflints totally adverse to spending money on marketing can succeed. Do you know how to save marketing money the skinflint way? To find out, check out this month's Biznology newsletter, "It Pays to Be a Skinflint Marketer."

Posted by mikemoran at 10:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack