Paul Chaney

Bizzuka Turn Here Video

via filmmaker.turnhere.com

Turn Here did this video for Bizzuka free of charge. It's part of a special promotion they had going. They use local videographers too. 

Posted via web from Paul Chaney's [Other] Blog

The Proprietary Web

I'm seeing a trend develop toward an Internet that is proprietary, differentiated and splintered. Quite the opposite of the homogeneous platform we were hoping it would become.

The differentiation itself takes several forms. For example, one is device-oriented, dependent on proprietary operating systems and applications, while another has to do with divergent social networks.  

Allow me to cite four subject-matter experts who testify to the reality of this phenomenon:

Josh Bernoff

In his most recent post, Forrester analyst Josh Bernoff heralds the "end of the Web's golden age."

"As we all gird for the launch of the Apple Tablet, take a moment to step back and realize what all these new devices are doing. The whole framework of the Web (and Web marketing) is based around the idea that everything is in a compatible format," says Bernoff. "Now with iPhones, Androids, Kindles, Tablets, and TVs connecting to the Web, that's not true."

Michael Killian

Avaya engineer Michael Killian adds his own spin to this idea: "The explosion in device technologies and types is a major part of the communication revolution and the challenges it presents to us."

"Device overload is nearly as impacting to me as communication and information overload and the social impacts of the communication revolution that I've written about before," he adds.

Geoff Cook

Geoff Cook, CEO of myYearbook, refers to another type of differentiation, which he calls the "stream wars."

"Over the coming decade, at least two types of winners will emerge from the stream wars. The first set of winners will be the creators of proprietary, differentiated streams."

Rich Tehrani

TMCNet CEO, Rich Tehrani, was one of the first to call attention to the "splinternet" over two years ago. 

"In the good old days having a website was good enough. This was your portal to the world -- your customers and everyone else. But slowly but surely a wealth of new communities are being created and if you aren't part of them, you could risk losing tremendous market share. In other words, a single homogeneous Internet is no longer what marketers can count on."

Do you get that? There is no longer a single, homogeneous Internet. We have none other than the likes of Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Ev Williams and others to thank for that. 

So, sports fans, as Michael Killian said, no longer do we merely suffer from information overload (as if that weren't bad enough), thanks to the introduction of a wide variety of mostly mobile devices, operating systems, social networks and apps, we've got a whole new ballgame. We can either view it as a problem or an opportunity. For certain, one thing we can't do is ignore it.

What do you think our response should be?

Help Haiti

In 1996, I spent a week in Haiti on a mission trip working in an area called the Leogane plain with an organization called New Missions. The Leogane plain a rural area not far from Port-Au-Prince. It's also not far from the epicenter of the earthquake.

 
(Click on image to enlarge) 

Like everyone else, New Missions lost buildings, some very critical ones too...schools, their medical clinic, offices. These are damaged beyond repair. What's worse, they also lost lives, including one of their teachers and several school children. 

In "normal" times life in Haiti is its own special kind of hell. The manner in which those people suffer gives new meaning to the word poverty. Though I've seen it first-hand, I cannot imagine what life there must be like now.

In light of that, I would like to ask you to consider donating to New Missions. They do incredible work feeding, clothing, educating and providing basic healthcare to Haiti's children. They also build basic infrastructure in the area in and around Leogane...for example, building wells in areas that, heretofore, had no clean drinking water.

Again, I've seen the difference New Missions makes in the lives of Haiti's poorest people. They are a long-established organization, one very worthy of your support. 

I've challenged the company at which I work, Bizzuka, to sponsor a fund-raising campaign directed to our clients. I'm asking you to give as well. Yes, New Missions is a Christian-based ministry. If that doesn't synch with your belief system, then find an organization you can support and donate to them. And do it now.

The eyes of the world are now turned on the poorest, most blighted country in the western hemisphere, and rightly so. I'm very hopeful that this will mean a turning point in the future of this country.

You Can't Handle the Truth!

It's not often I write a post that simply restates something said elsewhere, but this post from Harvard Business Review, When Your Company Culture Isn't Ready for Social Media, struck a chord. I think it's a good topic to start off the new year in our ongoing discussion of the use of social media in a business environment.

There is a lot of talk about the "how" of social media -- how to create a Facebook Page or how to monetize Twitter, etc. -- with less emphasis about the "why," and even less about whether a particular company's corporate culture is even ready for its use. 

"Do we really want to have a two-way conversation with our employees, partners, and suppliers?" is the question asked in the Business Review post, and it's one that every CEO must ask of his/her own company. 

The post cites two examples as case-in-point. 

1. An executive publishes her first blog post, primarily addressing her employees, but open to the public. She intends for the blog to help the survivors of a recent downsizing, mentions that those who left the company are talented employees, and that the survivors should do things that replenish their spirit. The wife of a laid-off employee sends the CEO a letter demanding the resignation of the executive because she finds the section on replenishing the spirit frivolous and insensitive. What would your CEO do?
2. The company implements an internal-only social networking platform that allows rating, tagging, and comments on products and services. A new service, offered by HR, receives very low ratings and negative, but not mean-spirited, comments. The head of HR requests that all the comments and the ratings be taken down. Would your company approve this request?

How a company responds to those scenarios is telling of its readiness to incorporate social media.

I'm happy to report that, based on a recent incident with a user of our Web content management software, my company, Bizzuka, is on its way to a more open, transparent culture. 

Here's a quick run-down:

1. It started with this tweet from a user. (I've blocked the username/avatar to retain the user's privacy.)

2. I responded via the Bizzuka Twitter account, asking how we can help and what we could do to make the product better. 

3. Our CEO entered into a dialog with the user which resulted in our inviting him to provide input on how we can improve the component. 

The truth is the user was right. Our photo gallery is not up to par and needs to be fixed. This encounter provided just the impetus we needed to move in that direction. 

Even though Bizzuka is a small company, I wouldn't be surprised to see this type of thing happen with greater frequency. (In fact, I hope it does.) What, then, can be learned from this incident which will help us better prepare for subsequent ones?

Understand the shift to peer-to-peer communication has already happened. 

That leaves you with several alternatives. You can: 

• Take the ostrich approach, stick your head in the sand, hoping that it will go away. It won't.
• Choose to continue to play by the old rules of top-down-command-and-control communications, keep the message close to the vest and purge comments that contain anything negative.
• Play catch-up, but in a reactive sense with no real plan of engagement. -or-
• Be pro-active. Understand that the game has changed and make the necessary changes to your corporate culture to adapt. Creating a well-thought out social media engagement plan is a good first step.

The Harvard Business Review post suggests the following: 

"[P]ilot a small project, focused on a specific business need. For example, a new product team could use a private, secure social networking tool to communicate with each other and store important documents, training guides, past correspondence and feedback from customers. 

"[I]mplement a broad scale, highly focused tool, such as an expert employee directory with additional social networking capabilities progressively turned on as the organization acclimates. 

"[C]reate and launch an Innovation Jam — a one-day idea generation day created to engage the entire workforce on ways to improve and enhance current products and services or propose new ones."

Understand that trust is a commodity in short supply. 

Consumers are increasingly skeptical of advertising and marketing messages. They trust other consumers like themselves, before they trust us. 

In their social media manifesto, Trust Economies, authors Chris Brogan and Julien Smith assert, “We are suspicious of marketing. We don't trust strangers as willingly. Buzz is suspect. It can be bought. Instead, consumers and business people alike are looking towards trust. We want our friends to tell us it's good. We want someone we know to say we should look into it.”

We need to do everything within our power to secure the trust of our customers. 

Authenticity and transparency are the ultimate keys to effective social media engagement. 

Though much ballyhooed, these two words represent the chief cornerstones of social media marketing. I call them the double-helix of social media DNA. It is in a company's best interest, in every way possible, to inculcate these into both external and internal communications. If it is trust that needs to be gained (or regained), this is the place to start. 

It's not easy to change a company's culture to one that's open and honest, willing to take criticism on the chin, even letting it live on the Web site or blog, but change we must. 

What other lessons do you think can be learned? And, how is your company doing? Leave a comment stating an example of where you've seen change happen. 

My Name is Paul and I Am a Recovering Twitter Purist

Mary McKnight and I were catching up after a long hiatus and, as social media devotees are apt to do, the discussion turned to Twitter and our use of it.

Since both of us are self-admitted Twitter purists, I was a bit shocked to hear Mary say she uses auto-DMs when people follow her. OMG!!! Noooo!!!! Not you Mary!!!! Say it ain't so!

She explained there are ways to use auto-DMs to foster engagement and traffic to her Web site. Not through a sales pitch, but via the use of humor.

She's not the only one. A client of Bizzuka who uses our Internet marketing services division, Bizzuka|Interact, to help with SEO, branding and social media, also uses auto-DMs and asserts that most of the interaction on his Web site comes from that tactic. (DISCLAIMER: I had advised him against such use.)

Here's my confession

Soooo...because I respect both Mary and my client, I'm rethinking the whole auto-DM notion. I also have a confession of my own to make. I use auto-follows.

I know what you're thinking. I'm a reprobate, someone not to be trusted ever again. But, hear me out before passing judgment.

When I first started using Twitter (and for a long while thereafter), I checked out every person who followed me to determine whether it was in my best interest to return the favor. I looked for particular criteria, such as the use of @replies, retweets, a completed bio with a link, and other such markers.

However, the time came when I could no longer do that. It required too much...time, that is. Being the cordial, courteous Southerner that I am, I couldn't just not follow people, so I relented and used an auto-follow device.

(Truth is, I'm finding it takes just as much time to keep the list clear of spammers as it did to vet each one. Danged if you do and danged if you don't, as they say.)

Here's my #unfail

To Mary's point, I've found that my use of Twitter has changed and evolved over the years (I started using the app in early 2007). At first, I did a lot of listening and little posting. Then I went through a phase of wondering where anyone would care about what I posted or whether it had enough value to be attended to. (Another admission -- I have self-esteem issues.).

Once I got over that, I became a Twitter "engage-a-holic" and felt that engagement was, indeed, the name of the game. The idea of interacting on Twitter solely for the purpose of broadcast was far afield from my purist way of thinking.

Through continued use, I came to realize "Twitter is as Twitter does." Best practices are still being determined, and while I feign the use of Twitter solely as a pitch medium, my determination of how it should be used is much more flexible. In fact, I don't know if "should" is even the verb that, um, should be used. Now, when asked to define what Twitter is, I simply say, it's whatever you need it to be (within reason, of course).

I mean, look at how Dell is using it as a way to sell millions of dollars worth of inventory via the Dell Outlet account. What's the latest figures, something like $6 million plus. Amazing!

So, how has your use of Twitter changed over the years? What's your Twitter #unfail?

I'll make the same deal as Mary did in her post on the topic. To quote her, "[I]f you join this meme and use the hashtag #unfail on Twitter in the next 36 hours, I will link to you from this post." Time starts now!

PS: While you're at it, why not write a blog post describing how your use of Twitter has changed since you first started.

Three Social Media Trends That Will Drive 2010

This is reprinted from SmartBrief on Social Media. It is an analysis I wrote as a result of some end of the end polling. Here is the original source. 

Social media gained ground as a tool for marketing and business communications in 2009, and 2010 should prove to be no less significant. What will evolve is a leaner and meaner version of the medium from a business perspective, one that has proved its return on investment value.

Maturation of social media for business should take place on three fronts: aggregation of content, further integration with the mobile Web and, most important, improved analytics.

• Building better filters. Because we are inundated with a fire hose of information daily, the need for content filtering will become paramount. In fact, job descriptions will be written around this topic and, as with measurement, software tools will be built to ensure that we only see the content we need.

• Going mobile. Thanks to the iPhone, BlackBerry and, now, Android, the mobile Web will be the third area to gain acceptance in 2010. The real-time, always-on evolution of the Web requires that we stay connected to our communities of practice, and the only way that can be accomplished is through the use of mobile technology.

• Measuring our work. The mystique around measuring social media's effects will evaporate thanks to better software, as well as a keener understanding of how social media supports business objectives and a better grasp of which metrics a business should track.

  The notion that social media is difficult to measure will give way to greater clarity, leading more CEOs and other leaders to readily adopt the technology. No longer will it be considered a "curiosity," but be seen as an aligned channel designed to integrate with other, more traditional, forms of marketing. The end result will be that, as you indicate, more money will be shifted to online and, specifically, social media.

2010 promises a bright future for social-media endorsement, adoption and engagement. Problems we began wrestling with in 2009 will be more fully addressed in this coming year. The question of "why should we use it" will give way to "how can we use it more effectively."

That's my analysis of what 2010 holds in terms of trends for social media. What others would you suggest? 

The Relationship Between Social Media and Word of Mouth

Recently, I was invited by Andy Sernovitz, the guy who literally wrote the book on Word of Mouth marketing, to join a group he started called WOMBATS (Word Of Mouth Believers And Talkers). 

While I don't consider myself a WOM marketing expert by any stretch of the imagination, I am a "believer and talker," and appreciative to Andy for the invitation. 

Some of the discussions among group members spurred my thinking about the relationship between WOM and social media, so I reached out to the group and asked the question, what is the relationship between word of mouth marketing and social media marketing? 

That gave way to a bevy of responses, which I plan to turn into a multi-part series here (don't know how many as of yet). 

I'd like to kick off the discussion by sharing Andy's response. I'd like to hear yours as well in the form of a comment, so please feel free to share. 

Andy's remarks...

"Social media is an incredible tool. It enables fast conversations as well as widespread conversations and connects people who would rarely see each other. It gives speed and scale to word of mouth. But social media is not word of mouth marketing. It’s a tool we can use for the online portion of word of mouth. 

"But it's not even the main tool there. I would argue that more recommendations go by plain old-fashioned email than all the social networks combined.

"On top of that, offline word of mouth is so much bigger than online. A tweet still doesn't beat a personal recommendation from a close friend.

"The point of word of mouth is to be a brand worth talking about.  To be a company that people are proud to tell their friends about. It's to replace paid marketing with personal connections. To replace cash with love. To be fantastic.

"Social media adds scale and reach to word of mouth. Word of mouth is the thing that matters."

How would you respond to Andy's comments? Agree? Disagree? 

My Take on Twitter Follow Limits

(Photo courtesy of Flickr Creative Commons)

I have a client facing the ominous Twitter 2000 follower limit. You know, the one where you can follow up to 2K without the 10 percent rule being enforced, then after it is. 

The strategy for dealing with that phenomena is well-documented. You can read why Twitter imposed the policy here, get a further explanation here, and learn how to negotiate it here. 

Basically, the policy was put in place to prevent spamming and dealing with it involves an often tedious process of unfollowing those who don't follow you, balancing the follow/follower ratio, etc. It can be a pain. 

We're putting our focus in the wrong place

Instead of walking the Twitter follow tightrope, we should be focused on increasing our own follower count, not the list of people we're following, for there is no limit on how many people who can follow you. 

"I’m afraid this has gotten confused. There is no limit to the number of followers you can have," said Twitter co-founder Evan Williams in response to a blog post on the subject.

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't follow others. If for no other reason, it is a point of common courtesy and evidences that you are a good citizen of the Twitterverse. I'm saying that, instead of ruining your day worrying about the 10 percent ratio, you should focus on doing the kinds of things that get people to want to follow you. 

Here are my suggestions:

Answer the right questions
Instead of answering the question, "What are you doing?" answer another instead: "What do the members of the community you are attempting to reach care about?" Or, "what resources would this community find valuable?" Address those questions and you are well on your way to getting lots of attention. 

Provide valuable resources
Similarly, if your focus is on the people whose attention you want to attract, then you will tune your mental radar to be aware of resources, both your own and others, they would appreciate. These could come in any form, from blog posts to videos to PDFs. 

Don't constantly pimp your own stuff
You may think that by only posting links to your own content that people will flock to you. I hate to disappoint you, but the likelihood is they won't. I'd use something like a 5:1 ratio of posting links to other's resources as opposed to your own. Five of theirs and you can reward yourself by posting one of yours. That's fair isn't it?

Don't spend a lot of time posting quotes
This is a pet peeve of mine, but I don't see a lot of value in constantly posting quotes. A few every now and then are okay, but unless your particular "schtick" is quotes, less is more. (Again, my pet peeve.) 

(Important to note: Twitter is a search engine and people are using it to find resources much in the same way they use Google. Why do you think both Google and Bing are now indexing tweets in search returns? I suppose some people would use Twitter to look for quotes, but more often than not, that's not the case.) 

Spend time engaging the community in conversation
This is perhaps less a reason people use Twitter now than in the past, but it's important nonetheless. It's what separates you from the bots. Conversations make you real. They allow me to get to know you at least in a perfunctory sort of way. If I know you and I like you, I'll probably follow you. 

Retweet other user's content
This is one of most valuable things you can do for two reasons: It sends a tangible message that you are a good member of the community, and it extends a digital handshake to the person you're retweeting. You're giving them an attaboy, a virtual pat on the back. I know that when others retweet my content, it assures me that I've contributed something others find valuable. 

Become a valuable resource
Notice I did not say, provide valuable resources. (I've already said that.) What I mean is that your focus should be on building a personal brand such that when others think of you, they immediately ascribe value. (BTW, auto-DMs do not help your cause in that respect.) 

How do you accomplish that feat? By doing all of the above. What will be payoff be? More followers and inclusion on more Twitter lists which translate into even more followers. 

Currently, I'm on 165 different lists and the number grows almost every day. As you know, Twitter allows users to follow entire lists, so it amps up the chances of being followed dramatically. Guilty by association as it were. It's a nice "lagniappe," as we say in south Louisiana.

The inevitable outcome is you don't have to worry too much about that darn 2K follow limit! It will be of little consequence. I know it may sound like a lot of work and I am not suggesting it isn't, but it sure beats the heck out of slogging through dozens of Twitter follows to find those who aren't following you in return...and it's a lot more fun! 

How to Use Social Media for Lead Generation

How to Use Social Media for Lead Generation

View more documents from HubSpot Marketing. via www.slideshare.net

The folks at Hubspot coined the phrase Inbound Marketing and they have mastered the art. They've even written a book about it!

This presentation outlines in clear detail how to go about using attraction-based marketing techniques to turn visitors into buyers. If you're in sales or marketing, take time to review this. 

Let me suggest some other resources:

Can Social Media and Lead Generation Coalesce - post by Chris Sietsema (on Jason Baer's blog)

Best Fits for Social Media in the Sale Cycle - post by Chris Brogan

Increase B2B Lead Generation Using Social Media - Social Media B2B

LinkedIn: 22 Ways to Dominate - post/presentation by Jason Baer

The Complete Guide to Using Twitter for Business - ebook by moi (needs updating, but basic content is cogent)

The Digital Handshake: Seven Proven Strategies to Grow Your Business Using Social Media (I know, I'm pimping my own book, but there's good stuff in there that applies to this topic.)

How about you? What resources dealing with social media and lead generation would you recommend?

Is Social Media Marketing a Waste of Time?

MarketingProfs community manager Beth Harte started me thinking about this with her discussion in the MarketingProfs group at LinkedIn where she referenced a post by Social Media Explorer Jason Falls who said...

"I’ve got news for you. In the world of business, all that [social media] talk will get you exactly nowhere. Conversations do not ring the cash register. Engagement does not sell more product. Talking with people just means you have to take time to listen which prevents you from spending valuable time selling more product."

A short while later I came across a post by John Jantsch who suggests we should stop wasting our time with social media. He said...

"In short, without a plan, one that’s steeped in your overall marketing strategy, any tactical form of marketing, including creating a Facebook Group, will be a waste of time." 

What's the common thread between both discussions? Is it that social media is a waste of time and that we should all grow up, forget about this "markets are conversations" meme and get back to the real work of marketing? Not at all! 

Both Jason and John tout the virtues of social media engagement, but wisely discern that there are limits. It's not a panacea, not a nirvana, nor a replacement for other forms of marketing. Social media, in and of itself, is a marketing approach that needs to be integrated with other forms and help drive revenue to the organization.

"If you don’t stop selling the fluff and start driving the bottom line, you’re going to have to go back to whatever you were doing in 2005," said Jason. "Make your company blog drive search results to the keywords you want to win. Present calls to action that lead your Facebook fans to buy your product. Entice Twitter followers to subscribe to your e-mail newsletter where you can present similar calls to action for purchase."

John's emphasis is on the need to begin by crafting a marketing strategy of which social media may be a part. "In short, without a plan, one that’s steeped in your overall marketing strategy, any tactical form of marketing, including creating a Facebook Group, will be a waste of time," says John.

John suggests you start with strategy and let tactics follow. And he sees social media as a tactic, not an overall strategy. 

One person who has this down pat is Chris Baggott, founder and CEO of Compendium Blogware. Take a look, for example, at his own blog:

There are no less than five (count em, five!) calls-to-action associated with the blog, one in the header, three in the right-hand column and one beneath the post itself. While that may seem a bit like overkill, I think Chris does it to artfully emphasize the need to associate informational content-oriented marketing (i.e. a blog) with direct response, lead generation approaches.

In closing, here are my responses, first to Beth's discussion question, then to Jason and John's post respectively: 

"My mantra is that of the Cluetrain's, markets are conversations, therefore, participation is marketing. However, that being said, it doesn't ring quite so true down the hall with the sales staff. They want to see the cash register ring. To get that they need leads and plenty of them. (I find the CEO tends to side with them as well. Something about the balance sheet, P&L statements and EBITDA) 

"The onus up.on me now is to prove that social media works in real-world business environments. The blog posts I have on my edcal involve very pragmatic content, designed to prove the case for social media engagement."

------------------

"In 2005 I was doing the same thing I'm doing today, just with a different and more limited set of tools (blogs mostly), and that's proving the case for new media. 

"I'm a purist, but enough of a pragmatist to know that social media is not the begin-all/end-all. It's part of an integrated marketing effort that involves an emphasis on calls-to-action, lead generation and bottom-line differentiation. 

"One of the largest deals we ever signed at the company at which I work came as a result of my participation in the blog and social media spheres. You're right, it's the longer road, but it can and does lead to a payoff. 

"Chris Baggott just testified to the positive effect blogs are having. How long have they been around, more than a decade? Give Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter et al time to mature. Each will find its place in the marketing mix. As you noted, it already is."

------------------

"I'm with you on this one. Any form of marketing engagement must begin with a focus on strategy. To do otherwise is to take a shot in the dark. Social media can and does work, but, as a form of marketing, it is subject to the same rigors and scrutiny faced by any other form.

"And while I'd love to suggest that conversations in and of themselves are sufficient to drive results, without and end game, they often do not. At least, that's been my experience.Lead with strategy and the appropriate tactics will follow."