On a WIM

Microsoft to Google: Success can be a dangerous thing

2011-05-01T19:11:00.000-05:00

I remember when Microsoft held a position in the public eye as essentially a trusted friend. Microsoft pioneered making our lies easier with Windows and Office tools. I know - it's hard to remember, but there was such a time. It's hard to remember because nowadays Microsoft is viewed as the big bully on the block. I seem to recall that it all started with Netscape.

Netscape use to be the dominant browser on the market. In some areas Microsoft is an innovator, but in other ways it's late on the scene. This was the case with Internet browsers. In the beginning, the market was dominated by Netscape. Netscape was all the buzz. That is until Internet Explorer came on the scene and Microsoft began flexing it's muscles. The collapse of Netscape was fast and deadly. If your memory of Netscape is vague or non-existent, then you're not alone. Netscape eventually became such an obscurity that it was taken over by AOL before it was retired. Talk about Hero to Zero. All thanks to Microsoft.

Of course now it's a different story. Microsoft is no longer a darling in the public eye. Since those early days of Netscape, Microsoft has gone from popular to the big bully on the block. Firefox has stepped in where Netscape was and become a viable threat to Internet Explorer. At one point, Internet Explorer had over 80% of the browser market. Now they only claim 45% of the market. Firefox is at 30% with Google's Chrome at 16.5%. Apple's Safari is a distant 4th with 5% (Sitepoint - http://blogs.sitepoint.com/ie6-usage-below-5-percent-browser-trends/).

Traveling a similar path is Google. Google is innovative in many ways. It is estimated that in the U.S. that Google's search engine constitutes nearly 85% of all searches (http://www.karmasnack.com/about/search-engine-market-share/). You may not realize all the products that are under the Google umbrella. Google has their hand in searches (Google), browsers (Chrome), video (YouTube), spam filtering (Postini), smart phones (Android), Maps (Google Maps), Photos (Picasa), Blogging (Blogspot), Email (GMail), Advertising (AdWords) and Office Applications (Docs), just to name a few. In fact, you'd probably be stunned to see how much Google is involved in (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_products). In the past few days I've used over 75% of these services. Odds are, you have too. That's just how dominant Google has become.

Just like Microsoft, Google has traveled the path of the public darling. All you have to do is look at the surge in popularity of their browser Chrome and phone OS Android. But like Microsoft, they are discovering that the transition from darling to bully comes with success.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has just announced that it is preparing to investigate Google's dominance (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-29/google-said-to-be-subject-of-ftc-probe-into-web-search-industry-dominance.html). In case you cannot recall, Microsoft endured similar accusations of anti-trust. It was a long and protracted fight in the U.S. but especially in Europe. The end result was hefty fines and legal fees. It might seem odd, but the risk a company faces by being too successful is being indispensible. Microsoft Windows is so popular that the entire world depends on it. I have seen numbers that suggest over 1 billion copies of Windows are in use today - this includes both legitimate and pirated versions of the operating system from Windows XP through Windows 7. Look at the software industry and how many companies rely on Windows for a substantial or complete portion of their revenue. As a result, Microsoft has become a victim of it's own success. They cannot promote or utilize their own software that runs on Windows above their competitors as this is deemed an unfair practice. When Microsoft tried to tie Internet Explorer more tightly to Windows they found themselves in numerous lawsuits and worldwide government investigations.

Google promotes services and products like GMail, Maps, Chrome and AdSense on their dominant search engine. Links from sites such as YouTube and Blogspot carry more weight in their rankings than links from similar types of sites. They seem to be following a similar pattern as Microsoft. And why not? They are simply doing what every successful business does - leverage it's assets to gain visibility in the eyes of it's clients. But as we've seen with Microsoft, there is a line you can cross where you can no longer play by the rules of everyone else. Microsoft and now Google have become so powerful and dominant that their success must be reigned in by the governments of the earth. Just watch and see.

Blog and Post at your own risk

2011-04-05T15:24:00.000-05:00

It surprising how many people see posting comments online as more private than it is. So far this year a number of teachers have been disciplined for disparaging remarks about their students. Each teacher posted their comments on Facebook as if they were unaware of the public reach of the social media site. While the privacy settings of Facebook can be confusing, most everyone understands that if you post a comment on Facebook all of your friends can see it unless you specify otherwise.

Or do they? Crosswalk.com reported that a 2010 survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers showed that 81 percent of "the nation's top divorce attorneys" reported an increase in social networking websites being used as evidence in divorce cases. Facebook is the leader, being cited in 66 percent of cases that involve online evidence. It would seem that a great number of people are not mindful of just how public social media is.

As the world becomes more and more digital, online conversations are flying around fast and furious. Emails and text messages are admissible as evidence in a court of law. In fact, EagleiOnline reports that early this year two separate judges ruled in separate cases that "...photographs, status updates, and other information from a plaintiff’s Facebook page were admissible in evidence... ". The SEC requires that businesses that deal in finance retain both email and online chat records. Failure to retain historical emails has led to numerous fines and judgments against businesses, some in exceeding millions of dollars. And as the courts will tell you, having your head in the sand or claiming ignorance won't save you.

Clearly, you need to be mindful of what you say online, just like you do in a public setting. How many politicians and public figures have been brought down by an ill-advised word? Even if the words are written from the privacy of your own home or office, once those words enter the domain of the Internet, they become public. Those of us who watched "The Social Network" recall how Mark Zuckerberg brazenly blogged about his hacking exploits at Harvard and how those words have come back to embarrass him time and again.

While I hardly consider myself an avid Facebook user, I do at least glance at it daily. It surprises me how often I see posts that involve cursing and disparaging remarks. Should an employer, manager, client or prospect read these posts and take offense, you may not like the consequences. You never know who is watching. So, considering the risks and legality of it all, isn't it better to treat social media as an opportunity to put your best foot forward rather than an online diary? Beware what you put out there - you may be shocked how it comes back to you.

DOTCOM, Take II?

2011-03-18T18:40:00.000-05:00

Is Facebook worth $74.8 billion after $2 billion in revenue in 2010? Is Twitter worth $7.2 billion after $45 million in revenue in 2010? How about LinkedIn at $2.8 billion after making $245 million in 2010 (it's first profitable year)? Groupon at $5.2 billion after making $750 million in 2010? Internet game designer Zynga at $9.3 billion after making $850 million in 2010? Is this the start of a new DOTCOM bubble?

Bloomberg polled investors in January of 2011 and only 14% believed Facebook's valuation, $50 billion at the time, was appropriate or low. Facebook raised $1.5 billion in financing with the help of Goldman Sachs in January. But more than 50% of the investors interviewed by Bloomberg saw this as the start of another technology bubble where companies are overvalued and stock prices inflated. Skepticism among international investors is especially strong.

The current valuation places Facebook on par with Internet giant Amazon after Amazon's valuation dropped despite generating $9.1 billion in sales in the first quarter. In other words, the market says Facebook is worth the same or more than Amazon even though Amazon is on track to make at least 10 times as much as the social media giant.

Yahoo is valued at $21 billion based off of roughly $4 billion in revenue. Over three times less value despite twice the profit. The Internet value leader is Google at $177 billion, this based off over $29 billion in revenue. 2.4 times the value based off of nearly 15 times the profit. Keep in mind that the concern investors are expressing is that we are at the start of another bubble. We are already seeing inflated valuations and we may only be at the start.

It's not just Facebook that is forming the cusp of a new bubble. Zynga is valued at over $9.3 billion, yet only had $850 million in revenue in 2010. The Internet gaming company is strongly tied to Facebook since this is where the majority of its gamers come from. Zynga's value surpassed Electronic Arts recently, which is valued at $6.1 billion based on $3.4 billion in revenue in 2010.

Hopefully, investors have not forgotten the lessons learned from the DOTCOM collapse. We've already taken a step in that direction, but that does not mean we will return to those disastrous days. Perhaps the investments and buyouts that are simply speculative today will pan out to be golden tomorrow. Prudence suggests that we be cautious in our approach, but as any investor will tell you, there are plenty of people looking to speculate on the hopes of finding wealth at the end of the rainbow. We know from the 2001 collapse that as speculation grows even some seasoned investors bow to pressure and step onto the playing field. As the bubble grew and fortunes were made the temptation to cash in became too great for some. Could you sit on the sideline while your brother-in-law makes millions even if you understood what was being done? This is how the bubble grew and still threatens us today - on the back of greed, eventually taking on a life of it's own until common sense creeps into the picture and brings the dream crashing back to reality.

We have a long way to go before we reach those dark days of 2001. With any luck we'll have learned our lesson and history will not repeat itself.

Good Old Boy networks are actually full of good boys!

2011-03-01T11:24:00.002-06:00

Just like any small business owner, I've tried to break into a number of big businesses. I've had my share of success. More often than not, that success went hand in hand with someone I knew who gave me some sort of warm referral into the business.

I recently gave a presentation regarding how to build your sales pipeline. As I prepared, I researched the response rate for various marketing methods. Direct Mail, Telemarketing, Banner ads, Pay-per-click ads, TV commercials, etc. In every case, the response rate was below 10%, some far below. But one method produced results that blew all the other out of the water. According to Tom Hopkins in his book Sales Prospecting for Dummies, The closing rate for referrals is 60%. I'm not certain as to how accurate this number is, but I'm sure that your odds of success with a referral are far greater than with any other method you employ.

You've probably heard the statistic that it's 6 times easier to get an existing customer to do business with you again than it is to attract a new customer. The Rule of Seven is an old marketing adage that says a prospect needs to see or hear your marketing message at least seven times before they take action and buy from you. What simple message should this communicate to you and me? That getting people to do business with us takes a lot of effort. Why? Because people are not quick to trust someone until they feel confident in them and build a rapport with them. None of this is rocket science, yet there is often a disconnect between understanding this principle and how it came to be.

Let's be honest - you've gotten the short end of the stick before. You've lost a client to a "factually challenged" sales pitch. You were sold by someone who dropped the ball on you. You've been left "holding the bag". Someone you trusted took advantage of your trust for their own personal gain. It's happened to all of us, myself included. At some point we all need to trust someone and sometimes those people let us down in a big way. I don't know about you, but I'm a pretty skeptical person. I don't trust easily. A fair amount of that is because I've been sucker punched a few too many times. And this is why it takes so much effort to sell to people we don't know.

Becoming a member of a person's "circle of trust" is a big deal, which is why it's so well protected. People are hesitant to trust you with their business and even more hesitant to trust you with their contacts. The worst case scenario way of thinking is that it's bad enough for you to cause me headaches, but to cause me to lose face in the eyes of my peers with is even worse. I use to refer to these as "Good Old Boy Networks" - if you weren't part of the "in" crowd, you weren't getting in. Now I've come to appreciate them in a different light.

There are so many salesmen out there who are out for the quick sale. It's not about relationships or even doing a good job. It's about pouncing, making the kill and moving on. “Sales” has become a four letter work for most prospects. For prospects, it's become like the father who treasures his daughter trying to protect her from the boys who see her as little more than a conquest. Does he mean what he says or is he just saying whatever is necessary to make the sale? Salesmen have become so predatory that signs are up at many businesses proclaiming "No Solicitation". It's more than just a few bad apples that have made the whole bunch seem spoiled.

So the "Good Old Boy Networks" came into play. A sort of circling of the wagons to make sure the good are protected and bad stay out. It's not 100% foolproof, but it's a formidable obstacle to those trying to gain access to the inner circle. It is essentially a "Good Old Boy Network" that, for the most part, is filled with "good boys". If you want into this network, it will take time and evidence that you belong.

The true art of the sale is not how crafty can you be or what convincing argument can you come up with. A true artist has more strokes in his brush than the swift, violent ones. The true art is in carefully blending colors and slowly weaving them together to create a masterpiece. It takes time. The better the artwork, the more time involved. For salesmen, the correlation is that if you want to make a quality sale, get comfortable with taking your time. Don't rush it, but let it evolve. Let prospects warm up to you. Ultimately, the largest factor (though not always the deciding factor) in their decision of doing business with you is if they feel they like you and can trust you. And that takes time. If you're looking at the big picture, you should understand that you are not simply looking to make a sale, but to break into their network of contacts. A sale should not signify the end of the journey, but just the beginning. So take your time so that you're seen no longer as a salesman, but a good old boy.

Making Money the Facebook Way

2011-02-23T10:35:00.000-06:00

Facebook has reported that it has over 600 million users worldwide. It is believed that approximately half of that are active users. So 300 million users who are active on the site approximately 45 minutes every day. These are people for whom Facebook is deeply integrated into their day. I've had a lot of trouble understanding how people could review posts and pictures and such of their friends for that much time each day. I've known people who were very active on Facebook and even they didn't seem to spend that much time on it. So how did the average time spent on the site get so large?

Apps, or more specifically games. Facebook has become a platform for a large number of gaming apps. Just as designers found a hungry audience with iPhone apps, they are find a voracious audience with Facebook apps. Think about the numbers. Approximately 160 million iOS devices (iPhone, iPad, iTouch, etc.) have been sold worldwide. iPhone apps have received a great deal of attention. iPhone apps have become big business and, in some cases, have made designers wealthy overnight. All this with a 160 million user market.

Gaming platforms make the bulk of their money from licensing fees. Developers pay a portion of their sales to the platform creator for the right to create and sell games that work on that platform. The current consoles are dominated by Nintendo (Wii), Sony (Playstation) and Microsoft (XBox). The dominant handheld platforms are Nintendo DS and Sony PSP. All platforms combined have sold nearly 900 million units since their initial launch. The video game industry is a $15.6 billion industry in the US alone and approximately $50 billion worldwide.

Included in that number are social media games - the games that run on social media sites like Facebook. Zynga Game Network accounted for over $530 million of the gaming industry total. Zygna boasts an active audience of over 210 million Facebook users on the numerous games it operates on Facebook like Farmville, Frontierville and Mafia Wars. Farmville alone has 57 million users. In fact, six of the top 10 apps on Facebook belong to Zygna. In late 2010 the market valuation for Zygna surpassed industry giant EA Games.

And now we come to how Facebook makes its money. Just as with the gaming industry, Facebook takes a portion of each sale that comes through apps on their site. In 2010, Facebook took in $400 million in these types of fees. Additionally, these app developers advertise on Facebook to promote their apps. Currently a third of all ads sold on Facebook come from Zygna and other app developers. Groupon, the one massive deal a day site - considered to be the fastest growing company in the history of business - and similar businesses account for another third of Facebook advertising.

Facebook has collected 600 million users who spend on average over 45 minutes per day on their site. They have collected the user base. Their profit model is to charge others who can successfully capitalize on that social media audience. This model very much reflects the gaming industry model, except that developers also pay the platform to advertise to their users. Zygna's valuation is based off its growth and the expected growth of the app market. It is because of companies like this and others that are finding ways to utilize and profit from the Facebook platform that Facebook is currently valued at $50 billion. That number is actually considered low by many market analysts.

"Over the next five years, most industries are going to get rethought to be social and designed around people…A social version of anything can almost always be much more engaging and out-perform a non-social version.

Our view is that we should play a role in helping to re-form and re-think all those industries, and we'll get value proportional to what we put in. In gaming, we get some percentage of the value of those companies through ads and credits. But that's all because we're helping them.

If we're helpful to other industries in building out what would be a good solution then there will be some way we get value from that."

- Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, Fall 2010

What he's talking about is consulting with companies to utilize Facebook's experience and expertise in order to re-engineer marketing where customers are reached from a social perspective. It's challenging and different in a number of ways. But Facebook is already at the heart of a symbiotic organism. Social media marketing companies drive and feed users to Facebook, increasing its market penetration. Facebook capitalizes on that user base to attract app developers who in turn pay Facebook for the ability to sell to that audience. The app developers profit from the user base. Facebook profits from the app developers and the marketing companies profit from businesses looking to reach the Facebook audience. Will app developers begin to develop business tools on Facebook? Will marketing companies develop apps as a means to promote their clients? Will Facebook remain fun, current and relevant? It's going to be interesting to watch this giant grow.

Getting to the top of Google ... but at what cost? The painful education of J.C.Penny's

2011-02-16T10:42:00.000-06:00

As we've seen with Windows, the more popular a product the more likely holes will be found and exploited. Such is the case with Google, the world's most popular search engine. A factor in increasing a site's ranking in Google is how many external links it has to it's website. The concept is that if people are linking to a certain page on a website, the more popular it is and therefore the more likely that a person who is searching in Google will want to see this page. So, the more external links to your site the better as far as Google is concerned. It sounds logical until you start thinking of ways to exploit this trait. If external links will increase the rankings of a site, then those links are valuable. Trying to get people to link to you can be a difficult process. Asking for links will only get you so far. You need a reason for people to link to you. This is why we've seen the rise of blogs, videos and social media as a means to drive traffic to sites. If the content is fresh and interesting, then people will visit with the expectation of reading or seeing something valuable. At least this is the traditional model employed by social media marketing firms.

But in the case of SearchDex, a Dallas based Search Engine Marketing firm, they took external links into new territory. Rather than just relying on traditional online methods to increase traffic to their client, J.C. Penny's, SearchDex started thinking like a hacker. SearchDex realized that external links to their client weren't just valuable, but literally had a monetary value associated with them. So, they paid thousands of websites for links to the J.C. Penny site. For a time, the strategy paid off. J.C. Penny's shot to the top of Google in numerous search terms, many times even ahead of the manufacturers they sold (such as Samsonite luggage). If the links had been paid ads on these sites, then that would have been different, but the links were embedded into pages as simple, basic links. So was SearchDex thinking outside the box or behaving unethically? When you consider that paying for links on a website is simply advertising, was SearchDex just utilizing advertising to promote their client's site? Should SearchDex be rewarded for their ingenuity or reprimanded for playing dirty?

In the case of Google and J.C. Penny's, SearchDex's unique approach brought reprimand. Google manually lowered the rankings of J.C. Penny's for exploiting Google's search results methodology. J.C. Penny's in turn accused SearchDex of compromising their ethical standards and fired them. Perhaps SearchDex was inspired by a New York based eyeglass seller last year whose business practices and customer service were so vilified online, that they ended up receiving countless links to their website. The result: they shot to the top of Google's rankings! In that case Google had to manually adjust the rankings for that site, foreshadowing the approach they'd take when others expose loopholes in their search results methodology.

Google defines the approach SearchDex took as a "link scheme". As the Google hackers come out of the wood work to devise ways to increase rankings, they either fall on the "devious, but white hat" side of Google's ethical line, or the "underground, black hat" side. Successful results can deliver high rankings and immense success for search engine marketing companies. But, if their methods are considered "black hat" by Google, the results can be disgrace and abject failure. When you consider that these companies are paid substantially to produce substantial results, having a company's website essentially wiped off the map because of their efforts is pretty much the definition of abject failure.

To be demoted in Google's search results is a near death penalty. Think of the fate universities endure when the NCAA penalizes their prominent athletic programs for paying athletes to play for them. Some programs have survived and later thrived, such as University of Kentucky basketball. Others were wiped out for decades like SMU football. Think of the millions upon millions those programs lost in TV, tournament and bowl revenue. Now you start to get the picture. J.C. Penny's demotions means dramatically less traffic as they will drop from a prominent position in the rankings to relative obscurity. When you consider that 70% of searchers never go beyond the first 10 search results, a change of even 10 spots is dramatic, especially when you multiply that by the number of terms where J.C. Penny's was showing up near or at the top. And it's a good bet that J.C. Penny's dropped more than 10 spots ... a lot more.

So the lesson? The ride to the top is paved with innovative ideas, but the slide back to the bottom is greased with the "get ahead at any cost" mentality. Chose your Internet marketing firm carefully or you may find yourself playing a gut-wrenching version of "Chutes and Ladders".

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/business/13search.html

The New Cold War?

2011-02-14T21:15:00.000-06:00

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3830559

It's stunning to think how bold the Chinese have become in attacking foreign governments and businesses. Because not a single shot is being fired it's not drawing much attention. When you consider the magnitude and targets of their espionage efforts, it's downright frightening. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission concluded that "A successful attack on these Internet-connected networks could paralyze the United States". In 2007, the 10 most prominent U.S. defense companies, including Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman, were victims of cyber espionage, the commission reports. The more you read, the more alarming it is.

Cyber terrorism is a bloodless crime that is subversive and damaging to the U.S. It's equivalent to releasing a bio-weapon that slowly injures and destroys those it attacks. That's because of the level of attention it is receiving. If the Chinese fired a rifle at U.S. interests, it would become an international incident. Yet the U.S. government has barely commented on the affair. A White House spokesman commented that President Obama wanted "some answers" and agreed those responsible should "face consequences". Hardly a strong response.

Indeed, U.S. policy towards China and the Internet has been that China has been restricting the freedoms of Chinese because it does not provide unrestricted Internet access. So, as the U.S. endures repeated and powerful cyber attacks from China, our government questions

China

on why more Chinese don't have unrestricted Internet access? It seems like there's a disconnect here.

Why am I so concerned? When you consider the value of the information stolen from corporations, the secrets stolen from the government and the frightening capability the Chinese have shown to potentially bring down our nations defenses including it's ability to simply respond to any threat, I can't understand why so many more are not outraged at our government's (or any government's for that matter) lack of a response. Perhaps it's because of China's thriving economy and deep investments in foreign governments. I'm not sure ... I just know I'm shocked that it's as widespread as it is and it's received such little attention. Perhaps it's similar to the Cold War - where the activities are subtle and mostly hidden from the public eye. If so, the U.S. is playing their hand very close to their vest - so close that I can't even tell if they're aware they're in the game.

Delivery of the Game Ball

2011-02-13T18:41:00.001-06:00

http://www.wired.com/playbook/2010/10/michigan-parachute-game-ball/

I thought this was so impressive. How a man could jump out of a plane and hit the dead center of a target is amazing to me. I couldn't help but think of how this parallel's the way a company should operate with its clients. I know that for us, when a client contacts us, we initially have, at best, the 10,000 foot view of their needs. The same is often true of the client, where they have to define and refine their goals for the project. The more we dig, the more details there are to be worked through. This is probably the biggest surprise to clients - the amount of work they must perform to get the best value from their web presence. This is equivalent to the amount of work the paratrooper had to perform on his descent. Before watching the video, I'd have never imagined the amount of work required.

As we draw near to the goal, we have to constantly make sure we're in the ballpark. Though it's not in the video, we have to make sure we're in the RIGHT ballpark. A client may have certain wishes that are not a fit for their goals, so we need to bring this to their attention and encourage them in what our experience says is the right direction. If they emphasize a service or characteristic that does not have much traction with their target market, then their efforts will be less effective. If they want to include functionality within a software package that will discourage employees from using it, then it could short circuit efforts and minimize its impact.

Once we're sure we're in the ballpark, we then focus in on the goal. As the goal draws near, the pace seems to pick up. Certain discoveries are made near the end that must be accounted for. No matter how much you plan you'll always have a few details slip through the cracks. Plus, a plan should be flexible enough to allow adjustments as new information comes in (and you can be sure it will).

If everything works out, the client will find themselves at the center of their goal. Hitting the target dead-on is not a simple task and should never be taken for granted. We should be mindful of the paratrooper, who takes every jump seriously, devoting great preparation and focus to each one. Success is not something you happen upon - it's something you plan for and work hard to achieve.

Social Media creates job opportunities

2011-02-13T12:55:00.000-06:00

http://www.herald-review.com/news/national/article_5a1ffb20-1811-11e0-95b5-001cc4c002e0.html

As with all things that attract attention, large businesses are investigating ways to utilize the social media crazy to draw attention to their brand. Early adopters to this form of grass roots marketing have proven that there is benefit to being on the FaceBook, LinkedIn, MySpace, YouTube, Twitter, etc. bandwagon. When you consider the number of users on each of the larger social media site, it's hard to imagine any business with a little bit of room in the marketing budget not exploring these diamond's in the rough. And I do mean "diamonds in the rough". While clearly the medium has proven wildly successful in capturing users, it has not proven successful yet in converting those users to dollars. Clearly, investors see a great deal of promise in these sites, but as to if that confidence will pay off ... only time will tell.

In the meantime, businesses are scrambling to jump on the bandwagon and companies that specialize in promotion on social media are popping up everywhere. It's a new niche that's seeing explosive growth.

Of particular interest to me in the article was the final sentence - "They rarely have a plan." referring to businesses that are scrambling to find a social media company to help them jump on this bandwagon. I posted earlier about how few companies have a plan. Leaders in businesses are so busy running that they're rarely looking up to see where they are running. It seems that I'm not the only one recognizing this, although in the case of this article, they were simply referencing a social media and/or marketing plan. I suspect that if we knew the actual number of leaders within a business that have little or no vision it would be disturbing.

Move like you've got a purpose

2011-02-11T12:39:00.000-06:00

I can remember some action film in the 80's (I think it was "Aliens") where a leader was issuing orders to his troops. He handed out instructions to each person under his command. When everyone had received their directions and he was finished issuing commands, he released them to their assigned tasks with the statement "Move like you've got a purpose". That always stuck with me. Now that I've been out in the business world for quite some time, I can see how often people need to hear this. Not just the troops, but even the generals - the managers and entrepreneurs and business leaders of this country.

A proverb in the Bible (Prov. 29:18) states "Where there is no vision, the people perish". How true is that for business? Businesses, particularly small businesses, will often run to collect business without a thought towards where they are going. Another well known saying is "If you fail to plan then you plan to fail". If you treat business like a rat in a maze, you'll run into a lot of dead ends before you find the cheese. Personally, I'm not interested in being forced into a confusing place with the hopes that I'll eventually find a treat. But if you are pursuing sales without any understanding of what your company is about, who specifically is your target, how specifically you are going to reach that target and what are you going to do with them once you get them, then you are operating like a rat in a maze.

If I gave you an instruction - travel from Dallas, TX to Seattle, WA - how would you handle it? Some would leap in their car and speed down the road. Some would pull out a map (or use Google Maps) and plan out their trip. Some would plan approximately where they would stop for food, gas and lodging. Some would even contact hotels to reserve a room for the night. On one end of the scale, you have the planners and on the other end of the scale you have people of action. Where do you fall on this scale? It is the nature of entrepreneurs to act. "Ready, Fire, Aim" is their mantra. It is the nature of coordinators and project planners to plan, sometimes to the point that their plan becomes a box in which they are trapped. Ideally, you should create a plan to know where you are going and what you need to do to get there, but keep the plan flexible so that as roadblocks, detours and dead ends occur you can use the knowledge gained to improve the plan.

So you need to put pen to paper, fingers to keys, stylus to pad - whatever method works for you, and create a vision. You need to dream. From that you need to narrow it down to a specific plan of action. It needs to address very specifically where do you want to go and how do you plan on getting there. At the end of it all you should have a list of action items, some quick and easy and some requiring a more sustained effort. If it involves sales, then it should at a minimum include a list of business and/or sales contacts that you are going to call. This action plan needs to guide you on the road you travel so that your efforts are spent pursuing those situations, people and clients that support where you want to go. In that way, "How are you going to get there" supports "Where do we want to go". If they don't line up, then your action plan is broken and you either need to change it to fit where you are going or you need to adjust your approach so that you actions are aligned with your plan.

In truth, this approach fits just about everything. Not that we're usually this intentional, but it could even be used to find a spouse (although online dating sites use this type of model). It applies to a sales plan, a business plan, a process plan, a marketing plan, etc. If you don't know where you're going you'll end up nowhere. Nowhere is a rat in a maze, scrambling down every open path in the desperate hopes of finding a scrap of cheese. So how's that working for you?

Social Networking May Not Be as Profitable as Many Think

2011-02-10T22:34:00.000-06:00

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/media/social-networking-may-not-be-as-profitable-as-many-think/19560291/

I thought this was an interesting article about converting a massive user audience into profitability. Company's like Twitter and FaceBook and LinkedIn are all the rage these days. As Social Media Marketing companies pop up across the landscape, it raises the question of profitability. Clearly, these mediums can be used to generate business - that's the cause for the social media boom among users. But are these social media giants profitable themselves? FaceBook has reported that it has 600 million users - that's more than the population of the entire North American Continent. The dilemma that faces these phenomenons is how to utilize this audience to turn a profit. FaceBook and LinkedIn are experimenting with pay-per-click ads, but will it work? Will an audience that claims it ignores ads actually respond to enough ads to make the price points sufficient for these social media superstars to turn a profit? Just as we learned with the DOTCOM bust, companies have to turn a profit at some time. When they don't their speculative bubble is burst and we're all left to feel the residual shockwave. As the DOTCOM bust and the current mortgage collapse has shown us, you don't have to be an investor to feel the backlash of such monumental collapses.

But let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am not predicting their collapse - I'm simply saying that if they fail, we will feel the effects of it. The big question at this point is how can they use their substantial user base to turn a profit? Will they be able to generate advertising revenue? LinkedIn has a paid service that helps generate some revenue, but most social media sites have no paid services. In reality, the value of a user base is the ability to solicit those users. It's a reasonable assumption that large advertisers will be willing to take a chance to reach such a larger user base. Google has recorded massive profits because its pay-per-click advertising model has proven itself. So, these large advertisers have a reliable online venue for reaching prospects and customers already. Google dominates the search market and reaches an enormous number of people. So, advertisers can take a cautious approach to FaceBook and its users because they already have a safe, reliable place to advertise online. But they are already slowly dipping their toe into the FaceBook advertising arena. And as they do, we'll start to get an indication of if they can turn a profit. It should be an interesting year!

Why in the world do you have a website?

2011-02-10T18:56:00.000-06:00

I'm a pretty active networker. I'm a firm believer in the philosophy that we can accomplish more together than we can individually. In truth, the passions you have can't be hidden. Spend enough time with people and you'll learn what light's their fire. So, when you act in a sales role, whatever passion you have about what you sell will come out.

I find myself repeating a certain question when discussing my business in these networking circles. "Why do you have a website?". It's funny, but we do some things without thinking about them. We do them because they're supposed to be done. We don't question why. So why do you have a website? Do you have one because everyone else has one? Do you have one because your competitors have one? Do you have one because you were told you need one? Why?

Too often I've designed a website because people wanted a website and not because they had a plan for it. The website was the plan. It's like building a house with no windows or doors. It's nonsensical. It's a house that was never intended to be lived in. A website that is built for the sake of being built is worthless. A website is a marketing tool. If your website does not generate business or augment your efforts to generate business, then it's serves no purpose. A website is one of the few things that people will willingly and repeatedly sink money into without expecting a return of any kind on their investment. They will literally sign a check month after month and never give a thought to "what am I getting for this money?" They'll shop web hosting company's to save a couple bucks a month on something that provides no value to them. That just makes no sense to me.

If you're seeing no return then you need to either stop spending the money or you need to make a change. Hold your website accountable just like you do anything else. Because the dollars for keeping a website are low, business are content with paying month after month with little or no expectations. The flip side, which many don't seem to realize, is that for far less than what you'd pay for most traditional advertising, you can use it to draw prospects to your door. So, spend a little and get nothing, spend a little more and add a salesman to your staff. Hmmm. Doesn't seem like a tough call to me.

So hold your website accountable. If it's dead weight, then fire it and replace it with something that works. Your website should look attractive to your target audience, so having an attractive website is a good, positive FIRST step. Does it provide a way for prospects to collect relevant information about you? Does it capture contact information of interested prospects? Does it provide a way for clients to engage you? That's the SECOND step - help clients connect with you through it.

Can prospects find you? Despite what "Field of Dreams" taught you, if you build it they will NOT come unless you tell them about it. The THIRD step is Internet marketing. Search Engine Optimization (showing up higher in search results), Pay-per-click ads (such as those that appear in Google, Bing, Facebook, etc.), Social Networking (FaceBook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Blogging, etc.) - all are relevant and positive ways to get the word out about your website so that prospects who are shopping for your services can find you. Posting video blogs or even "infomercials" on YouTube. Finding forums online that discuss topics within your realm of expertise and commenting on them. Establishing links to your website from partner sites (make sure it's TO your website). All of these are viable and even cheap methods to getting online exposure.

So, when you write that check this month, ask yourself ... what am I getting from this investment? Could I be getting more? You may not be able to fully answer that question, but I can think of someone who can help you find the answer.