Rare Bird Blog

Should Your Business Check-in with Foursquare?

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Technology changes pretty fast. Because of this, most of us are learning to change and adapt pretty quickly as well. The upside of this is that we’re readily adopting new application offerings and integrating them into our lives. Most of you have probably had this experience with things like LinkedIn or Facebook; some of you probably are using Twitter frequently.

This recent Indianapolis Business Journal article explores one of the new kids on the block, Foursquare, and the potential impact it might have on your business, especially if you own or run a retail location that depends on foot traffic.

[Read the complete article]

Need a problem solved? Think like a designer.

Monday, March 15, 2010

In a recent article (and accompanying video), award-winning author Warren Berger suggests that designers have just the right toolset to answer a whole range of questions; many of which fall outside the traditional role of 'design'.

"Don't think about design just as your logo or the visual aspect of your business; think of it as a process you can use to tackle problems in your business," says Mr. Berger. "Design is really just creative problem solving." He proposes that design can help answer fundamental questions like ‘What are we going to make? How can we make it better? And how can we satisfy our customers?'

The key is in the way that designers approach problems. "Designers are very good at asking what I call stupid questions," Mr. Berger says. "Why do we do things the way we do? Is this the best way to do it or could we do it differently? Small companies especially need to do that because they can get into a pattern of doing things a certain way for a long time."

This has certainly been my experience working with designers and other creatives for more than twenty years. The process can be challenging and difficult, but the results are nearly always rewarding and often surprising. It's this fundamental ability to look at things from alternate perspectives that makes the difference. Berger refers to it as 'lateral thinking', which seems appropriate. But it's often just as simple as breaking a problem and the possible solutions down into the smallest possible parts and re-thinking each step:

• Is this really necessary?
• How could changing this function affect the result?
• How could this part of the process be improved?

The article offers the example of the OXO Good Grips measuring cup, which allows you to see how full it is from above. “If you had asked people about their measuring cup, they'd say it was fine, but when you watched them, you could see that there was something that could be improved,” Mr. Berger says. The innovation came from actually watching people in their kitchens as they crouched down to get a better look at things.

Interesting stuff, and great food for thought for anyone facing a particularly thorny issue.

[Watch the video]
[Read the article]

Why Nobody Cares About 'Billions'

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Here's a great idea about how you should present your business data to investors, prospects, or even just Mom: forget the billions. In a recent article, author and business plan expert Tim Berry explains that these numbers and this top-down approach just don't mean anything to anyone.

"As an investor, as a business plan contest judge, or as a teacher, I don’t really care how many billions of dollars are spent on this or that or the next thing when I’m reading a business plan. That number is too big. It tells me nothing."

He explains that what really matters, and what most of us can easily get our arms (and brains) around are the simple numbers; the granularity. For a web-based business, figure out what it will cost to get a single visitor to the site and how you'll do it. If you're a restaurant, tell me how you'll fill those seats on opening night and what you'll make from each customer. If you're the government trying to sell me a new healthcare plan, put it in terms of cost per doctor's visit or an average monthly premium. Then you can build forecasts from these details up into the larger numbers.

Especially for those companies in the business-plan-writing stages, this can be invaluable. Berry says, "I know that I’m in the majority, among people who read business plans, in really disliking the top-down, billions and billions kind of forecasts. When they start talking about getting only a very small percentage of an enormous market, they lose me. Those huge markets don’t split down into millions of pieces."

[Read the entire article]

Labels: business consulting, business forecasts, marketing

You Think Your Family is Awkward?

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

This is an article I didn't want to write, for two reasons: First, I know several people regularly to read these articles and depend on me (to some degree) to keep them informed about 'what's happening' online. Second, sharing this guilty pleasure makes me feel a little... well, grimy. Especially in light of the first reason. But it seems to me that we've reached a point in our lives, with this economy, the unemployment rate, and tax day right around the corner, where we could use a good laugh. So I've decided it's time to tell you about Awkward Family Photos.

[Learn more »]

Can social media replace traditional marketing communications? Doesn't look likely...

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Dan forwarded me an article today that ranks right up near the top of my "Things to read that are relevant" list. Titled "What If Giving Up Your Brand Really Means Giving Up?" this Advertising Age article from Jonathan Salem Baskin asks some very pointed questions and draws some mildly controversial conclusions. (At least, I'm assuming they might be considered controversial among those people advocating a complete rush to social media in lieu of traditional branding, but it hasn't seemed to bubble up to the top of Digg or gain a notable trend on Twitter, so we may never know.)

Baskin argues, basing his conclusions on the recent Edelman 2010 Trust Barometer, that consumers are growing weary (and wary) of their peers as credible sources of branding information. Where we once happily turned to people we trust to learn their opinions about a company or brand, we're now skeptical of the same people and what they have to say. Maybe it's because so many have turned out to be shills working on behalf of the companies they were promoting. Or maybe it's because some of them turned out to be the actual companies themselves, pretending to be average Joes.

Or maybe it's because Twitter recently announced that they've surpassed the 50 million tweets per day mark, and we're all buried under the noise.

Regardless, this paragraph from the article seems a perfect summation:

"If we renewed our commitment to selling based on credibility, authenticity and utility, maybe people would trust what we tell them, respect our corporate reputations, and give us their purchasing loyalty. Maybe if we stopped thinking we can give up responsibility for why they should buy, and start acting like David Ogilvy and sell to them once again, they'd find comfort relying on our communications as well as the subsequent iterations through the social echo chamber. This might unleash the ultimate promise of social and empower people to know, discuss and change the way businesses function, not just blather on about marketing blather."

Absolutely, positively right on the mark. I recommend that you read the rest of his excellent article. You can also read the results of the Edelman study. Enlightening stuff.

Labels: authenticity, marketing, social media, twitter

Circa 1995: “Hype alert: Why cyberspace isn't, and never will be, nirvana”

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Clifford Stoll was wrong. And partly right, too.

A Newsweek article from 1995 titled, "The Internet? Bah!" and sporting the unfortunate subtitle "Hype alert: Why cyberspace isn't, and never will be, nirvana" has recently begun making the rounds on the internet. As you can imagine, it's normally passed along with some comment about how short sighted the author, Clifford Stoll, must have been. "The poor guy," so the sentiment goes, "how could he have been so blind to what the rest of us could see so clearly?"

But when you read the article, it's easy to see that some of the problems he addressed were real. Some even continue today. But others... whoa! He couldn't have been further off the mark. Some examples:

"The truth is no online database will replace your daily newspaper, no CD-ROM can take the place of a competent teacher and no computer network will change the way government works."

That's a sentence I'm guessing he'd like to have back.

"How about electronic publishing? Try reading a book on disc. At best, it's an unpleasant chore: the myopic glow of a clunky computer replaces the friendly pages of a book. And you can't tote that laptop to the beach. Yet Nicholas Negroponte, director of the MIT Media Lab, predicts that we'll soon buy books and newspapers straight over the Intenet. Uh, sure."

Another crow he's certainly chewing on. Interestingly, it seems that Stoll's biggest problem in this whole mess was his inability (or unwillingness) to accept that things would change, technology would improve, and the status quo would be ever nudged in the direction of improvement. On the other hand, he was trying to sell a book he'd written called "Silicon Snake Oil - Second Thoughts on the Information Superhighway," so I think we can at least understand his perspective.

But just before that previous line about books, Stoll offered this:

"Consider today's online world. The Usenet, a worldwide bulletin board, allows anyone to post messages across the nation. Your word gets out, leapfrogging editors and publishers. Every voice can be heard cheaply and instantly. The result? Every voice is heard. The cacophany more closely resembles citizens band radio, complete with handles, harrasment, and anonymous threats. When most everyone shouts, few listen."

Honestly, to me, that still sounds a lot like today's world. Just substitute "internet" for Usenet, and you'll get a feel for blogging, Twitter, Facebook, and much of the other platforms people are using to 'spread the word.'

He also talks about the loss of human contact, and he's certainly right about that. There really is no substitute for being face-to-face, but the technology is certainly getting better in this area every day. My kids love talking with their grandparents over video chat, and it's easy enough that any of them– including the five year olds– can do it on their own.

But there are two paragraphs that really struck me as so far out in left field as to be on another planet. They are:

"Then there's cyberbusiness. We're promised instant catalog shopping--just point and click for great deals. We'll order airline tickets over the network, make restaurant reservations and negotiate sales contracts. Stores will become obselete. So how come my local mall does more business in an afternoon than the entire Internet handles in a month? Even if there were a trustworthy way to send money over the Internet--which there isn't--the network is missing a most essential ingredient of capitalism: salespeople."

Obviously, online shopping is here to stay. Technology has solved the problem of transferring money online and this marketplace will only keep growing. But the internet won't kill the local mall. Some people like the act of shopping as much or more than the act of buying.

Lastly, he eschews the sea of information as being unedited, uncontrolled, and lacking completeness. Without "editors editors, reviewers or critics, the Internet has become a wasteland of unfiltered data. You don't know what to ignore and what's worth reading." Partly true. But discernment has always been a part of communication. Just because someone tells me something doesn't mean I should believe it.

He then laments the inability to find anything in the haystack:

"Logged onto the World Wide Web, I hunt for the date of the Battle of Trafalgar. Hundreds of files show up, and it takes 15 minutes to unravel them--one's a biography written by an eighth grader, the second is a computer game that doesn't work and the third is an image of a London monument. None answers my question..."

This actually made me laugh. Can you imagine a world without search? Instant information at your fingertips, wherever you are, whenever you need it.

As Clifford likely knows, the Battle of Trafalgar took place on October 21, 1805. It was a naval engagement between the British and the combined fleets of Spain and France. The British fleet was led by Lord Nelson, commanding from his flagship HMS Victory. And it took me about 7 seconds to find out.

For some fun, read Clifford Stoll's Newsweek article, "The Internet? Bah!"

For even more fun, watch Clifford Stoll talk about ...everything... on TED.

Is integrity vital for success?

Monday, February 15, 2010

We think so. Over the years, we've prided ourselves on our ability to have fierce conversations based on the principles of honesty, integrity, and truth. This is not to say that feelings are completely overlooked or that we take a tack where the complete truth must told despite the personal cost. We do, however, believe in the value of speaking the truth, owning up to mistakes, and openly dealing with things that might, at first, be uncomfortable. What we've learned is that it's preferable to deal with difficult issues early, as the longer they linger the worse things become.

We believe that our clients and friends appreciate this frankness. We believe this is one of the many reasons that they continue working with us, some for many years. As a result, our commitment to maintaining our integrity grows stronger with time. So when I saw this quote from President Eisenhower today, it rang completely true and I felt compelled to share it:

"The supreme quality for a leader is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is a section gang, on a football field, in an army, or in an office. If his associates find him guilty of phoniness, if they find that he lacks forthright integrity, he will fail. His teachings and actions must square with each other."

The first great need, therefore, is integrity and high purpose."

—Dwight D. Eisenhower