National sales and marketing congress, an annual event organized by Marketing Institute of Singapore invited me over for taking a one hour session with the audience. The topic? I evangelize (what I refer to as) Engagement led marketing and this seemed to be a good gathering to tackle the subject.

Engagement led marketing, by the way- is exactly that- marketing that is engagement driven. And engagement (to me) is glue that has the potential to tie together different digital (and other) disciplines.

A lot of effort went into this- specially designing and visualization (and I hope it is apparent). I am a bit of a sucker for visually appealing presentations with substance- and I hope I was able to deliver on both.

The presentation was quite well-received and thank God- all that effort was appreciated.

It is said that a one hour presentation requires 30 hours of effort- and I could not agree more. Apart from clearly presenting your own thinking, you need to provide context through research- latest wherever possible, and retain audience interest by making it visually relevant (thank God for photo sharing and creative commons, but finding the right images that tell the story you want to tell is a task- I tell you). Those things take time. (“A whole lot of precious time” as Paul McCartney would say)

On that topic, there are some guidelines I have started following regarding presenting to an audience- and time willing, I’d love to share the key points of delivering a presentation in a conference.

But that later.

I am approached by quite a few people complaining about the pace of technology, fragmentation of media and silo-ised disciplines. This presentation is an attempt to make people appreciate that all marketing disciplines need to work together; engagement led marketing thinking is the common ground/glue- and the key steps in drafting an engagement led integrated marketing strategy.

Think About it

Shalabh

Twitter: @shalabhpandey

We meet people everyday.

Many are achievers. Successful in what they do. There are others too. Some of them doing well, others not quite. And then there are yet some more- who are just, well, drifting along.

So what makes some people ‘successful’ and others not so much? What are the elements that contribute to being recognized, being well-off and achieving desired objectives?

Success is subjective. But note I did not define it is as- ‘being at the top’- or ‘first in the rat race’, or ’highest earning’ . Let’s say it is about achieving desired objectives. If success is about achieving desired objectives, then the question of what makes some people successful and others not- has been the age old pursuit of individuals.

The factors are explained here in the “Hierarchy of Success”.

When I set out to develop this hierarchy, I had ‘Professional success’ in mind. However, as this developed, I realized that this hierarchy could well define personal success too.

So here it is:

Hierarchy of Success

At the very bottom of this hierarchy is ‘Need’. This need defines your basic purpose of doing what you do (eg Working to earn a living, meeting everyday needs, etc)

This is a little different from Maslow’s ‘hierarchy of needs’ where it relates to Food, Shelter, Sex- though its position in the hierarchy is similar- right at the base.

This ‘Need’ in my hierarchy could have complex connotations. As an example- if you are pursuing a higher degree- like, say, an MBA- the need could be do get a job to earn a living. But for others within your peer group, the need could be completely different. For some of them, this need could be about earning a  ‘Social Proof’. In many societies, this is particularly important for demonstrating status in society, and could even define your standing while looking for a spouse!

Immediately up above ’Need’ is ‘Want’. ‘Want’ defines the desire to make things happen. It takes you beyond the bare essentials of what is required.

If you were doing an MBA with no intention of ‘getting a job’ – and had a family business- your ‘want’ could be going beyond the theory and test the practical applications of what you learn. So if you are a clerk in a bank, your ‘want’ will make you attend to that last person even after banking hours are over. If you are a working executive, your ‘want’ will make you do that extra bit of research and that little extra bit of effort in prettifying a presentation slide.

It is your ‘want’- that would make you go that extra step from ‘just getting by’ to ‘strutting along’.

Superseding ‘Want’ is ‘Ability’. It is the physical or intellectual prowess. Your talent.

If you had the need and the want to be a Strategic Fund planning manager in a leading Mutual fund institution- but you never could get along well with numbers and maths, what are the chances you will succeed?

You have a need and a want to be a White water rafting kayaker. Unfortunately, you have a lower back problem. Your back can’t take the immensely-demanding-on-your-back sport. Your ‘Ability’  deters you from being successful.

Ability can be refined. If you want to be a singer- and have a great voice- that voice is your ability. Hone it, refine it- and your chances of being successful are high.

A caveat surfaces at this stage. Your abilities will be in context of others. So you might be a good singer- but there might be others with an equally good abilities. This is the stage- when your Abilities demand ‘remarkability’ (credit to Seth Godin). The more remarkable your abilities are, better are the chances of success.

At the top of the hierarchy is ‘Attitude’. Attitude defines what you think, how you feel and what you do.

We see this regularly in our lives. The most talented person might not necessarily be successful. And someone with modest talent but abundant attitude went further.

This is so because as people, we are creatures of ‘intuition’. We have a ‘gut feel’ about things- that draws us to someone with an attitude that resonates with us. Why do you think the best singer in American Idol almost never wins? The contestant that has the most ‘appeal’ does go far though. People like the ‘appeal’ not necessarily technique. Politicians play on this and celebrities thrive on this factor. Ability gives you a standing- a fighting chance. Attitude makes you a Rock Star.

Just to clarify-Attitude does not mean being highly outgoing or being ‘in your face’. Attitude could be in the way you interact with others- or it could manifest in the way you work. It could even be that ‘X’ factor that makes you or your work appealing.

So that’s the hierarchy.

Need, Want, Ability and Attitude. Four key factors leading to success.

Hang on! Many times we do see people with mediocre/questionable abilities and attitudes. But they are successful too. So if they did not meet the 4 Key criterion, how did they become successful?

The base of the pyramid has the answers. And the halo at the top. These are the extraneous factors contributing to success. The internal factors within the pyramid are something you can control to an extent. The external factors could be more difficult to control.

One key factor is your ‘Network’. The social circle. The contacts.

If you know the right people, doors open. With right contacts, you get better directions and sometimes shortcuts. In today’s dog eat dog world, this could be of fundamental importance.

One of the reasons why successful schools and colleges breed successful professionals is because of this factor. If you are lucky to be educated within one of these institutions, your network will automatically consist of other successful individuals willing to help you out. And then the effect continues.

And then there is Luck. Chance. Whether you believe in ‘luck’ or not, sometimes opportunities appear in a way that is inexplicable. And the opposite is true too. If your luck is screwed, you are screwed too. When the times are good, they are rolling. And when the times are bad, no matter how much you strive or struggle - nothing seems to work.

You need to control this by understanding the circumstances and working towards what is in your control, rather than fretting about it.

One last thing. The halo at the top. The environment.

Imagine you being a hazara girl in Afghanistan. Immensely talented, with great attitude and want to become an elected leader of Afghanistan. Your family has some contacts in the right political circles. You are lucky in many ways to have survived many opposing forces and have got an education.

But the environment. To get your way in a society that does not look favorably to your gender or ethnicity; to be an environment where war is a way of life- what are the chances of success?

So that completes the diagram and the factors influencing success.

What happens to Hard Work then? How about Motivation? And what about mentors?

Look carefully- and Think about it.

Shalabh

…still Chasing The Storm

“Think About It”- Ideas shaping digital media and marketing in the new decade

Its love’s labour. Really.

After more than a year of running ChasingTheStorm – with loads of loving time spent- and acquiring loads of loving friend circle, this is it. I put together a book.

“Think About It” is a book inspired by Ideas from this website. With more meat, more thoughts and well, in a different format. The title of the book is actually the signature I use in most articles.

The book covers Digital Media and Marketing trends in the new decade, Mobile Media, new marketing paradigms and Marketing Case studies.

It is written not as a tutorial to digital media platforms or Digital marketing 101. Rather- it attempts to raise a storm on specific Digital media issues. Offering an easy read for the evolved, thinking marketer, it is a book to raise debate- and expects a degree of interest in Digital Media.

I’ll talk more about it later- but since I am quite excited about it, I decided to put up the news anyways.

It’ll go in print soon (and available online and on the Kindle)- but as usual, not without your support in its making. I need you to help pick up the right cover design.

My good friend Ankur Khurana volunteered to get the cover design done- and boy- he did get them designed in two days flat. Many thanks buddy. And many thanks to MG Harti- the Art Director who helped the idea come into reality by doing many iterations.

So here are the designs- (the copy/text and some elements are dummy).

Just from a design layout perspective- let me know which ones do you like the best?

You could comment here, or

Email me: shalabhpandey at gmail dotcom

DM or @ at Twitter : @shalabhpandey

The cover Designs for “Think About It”

GROUP 1:

Cover One

Cover 2

Cover 3

Cover 4

GROUP 2:

Cover 5

Cover 6

Cover 7

Cover 8

Comment here, or

Email me: shalabhpandey at gmail dotcom

DM or @ at Twitter : @shalabhpandey

Think About It

Shalabh

This article was published in iMediaConnection. For readers of ChasingTheStorm, pasting it here too.

You can see more on what I have written for iMediaConnection here.

The article on What to expect from 2010:

It is that time of the year again. Prognostications by industry watchers on the big next thing in (digital) marketing/media are all over the place. This is truffle sniffing season and we are all dogs in the jungle trying to sniff out truffles. I have had some success at this in the previous seasons, and here’s some I sniff this time around. Whoof!

Digital disciplines: From a digital marketing ‘discipline’ standpoint, social media and web analytics will gain huge traction. We will see more organizations deploy web analytics managers or make their system administrators get trained on web analytics (poor guys). Within a year, they will move to hiring new staff, realizing that the previous strategy was not exactly working out well. This might happen with in-house digital marketing staff too.

Social media and web analytics together will be the biggest force in 2010. If you thought you had heard enough about social media in 2009, are a ‘social media basher’ or are waiting for the ‘fad’ to die off, you have my sympathies on your disappointment. Not the least in 2010. As a matter of fact, analytics and social media will get closely intertwined. We are going to see this reach a different level of sophistication from a user and marketer perspective. More pain for the marketers, and cheerio to the users.

Omniture has realized that off site analytics needs to be tied in to onsite analytics in a seamless fashion and with one single tool. This is just the beginning. We will see multi-purpose tools for social graph management and we will see one tool attempting to aggregate reports being generated from multiple current tools like PeopleBrowser, SocialOmph, Hootsuite, Scoutlab, Radian6, Spiral16, Lazyfeed, etc. We will see many players entering in to this field and will see many acquisitions. The bigger sized companies will acquire the smaller companies to help provide a holistic interface. Whether or not this integration can truly happen is a subject of debate. There might not be a Swiss army knife for multiple reporting formats, but this will be attempted at the least.

Along with the maturing of the social media space, both from a user and marketer perspective, we will see mobile coming to play — finally. Social networking apps, location based apps and better, more robust mobile payment solutions will emerge. MOL buying Friendster is already being seen as social networking marrying casual gaming, ecommerce and mobile. I am tempted to mention color codes/QR codes in places other than Japan, but there is no evidence to see it coming next year (which is a pity). I will give it a miss at least for the first half of 2010.

Platform: From a platform perspective, expect to see ads on Twitter. Not really a prophecy since this has been in the offing for some time. But expect to see ‘differently’ targeted ads on Twitter. Expect to see contextual targeting acquire a new meaning. Facebook and LinkedIn will become more aggressive in advertising and we will see the emergence of more intelligent ads based on user behaviour, metadata information and interest.

Format: From a format standpoint, we are going to see the emergence of video. Not only will there be more marketing via video, there will be a further explosion of user generated content on video, specifically with an Asian perspective. And this will have an impact on both software-led and hardware-led services. Apart from the conventional players in digital imaging, we have heard about Cisco (acquiring) going full throttle with their Flip device, and there is no reason why there will not be a Chinese counterpart (maybe more loaded) — at half the cost. With all of this, happy videos to you.

Apart from video, we are going to see the reinvention of the banner space. Ads will be more rich, interactive and at the risk of sounding clichéd, ‘engaging’.

Off-site analytics: In off-site analytics (I don’t know if this is a term yet, but what I mean by this is  measuring all actions with respect to the brand happening outside of the ‘website’) I see the action-attribution phenomenon picking up steam. How different disciplines come together to achieve ultimate results will be the talk to watch out for (I am already working on this for the past few months). There will also be a marriage of offline metrics and online metrics. Online GRPs will be talked about a lot.

Alternate: Towards the second half of the next year, I see a wave of cloud-based services. Added to that, Chrome-powered net books — specialised single-purpose $100 laptops, towards the end of the year, will rule. How will that affect advertising/marketing? I would say this is still early days for this, and something to keep an eye on.

Client demands: From a client-agency relationship perspective, I see clients asking agencies for real digital expertise and holistic digital marketing offerings. They will demand subject matter specialists from the agencies. No one in advertising/marketing is pureplay ‘offline’ nowadays, so clients and agencies will quickly realize the difference that pureplay specialists bring to the table. Of course communications has always been ‘integrated’, hence we will see a re-emergence in demand for digital professionals. I also foresee them being groomed in TV/print advertising, in a shift from what we have seen in the past.

I hoped to write from a practical on-ground approach rather than something drastic and way too futuristic.

Web^sys: It surprises me when people, in their enthusiasm over sounding ‘cool’, say that the next big thing is semantic search, augmented reality or even brain/retina scanning technologies. Realistically speaking, before they mature, they are still pretty much ‘star trek’. Not unachievable but just immature.

There will be no ‘Web 3.0′ (as a term) but what I think is coming, as the next version of the web, is this — and this will happen from 2010 onwards:

The web 2.0 or conversational space will see a new level of sophistication. There will be better organization of content and more structured creation of content. Simply put, we will see the chaotic and unorganized nature of today’s conversational web become more systematic.

We will see the emergence of the ‘Systematic Web’ or Web^sys. The name itself will lead to the meaning unlike ‘Web 1.0′, ‘Web 2.0′ or ‘Web 3.0′ — which have been open to interpretation.

What do I mean by ‘Systematic’ and what are the findings that led me to this? I have covered this phenomenon in detail here. I invite you to give your opinions. The more truffles, the better it is. Happy Holidays. Whoof!

Think about it

Shalabh

OK. I give in. I succumbed to writing my Digital Marketing predictions for year 2010. The past few years have been spot on and I thought it might be good to pen down some thoughts- and revisit them later next year to get a pervert pleasure of how much and how many of them have been right.

iMediaConnection published the article, but a quick post explaining really what is the next wave for the digital media.

Essentially, my 2010 Digital media predictions are from a grounded and rational perspective. Of course, all of us are like Truffle hunting dogs at this time of the year- hunting for trends instead of truffles- and trusting our noses to get us there. But key is to keep expectations in place and have a more grounded perspective on what is practically achievable in the next 12 months timespan.

I have mentioned a few things- that you can find in another article , but I wanted to highlight one special point.

Of all the prognostications surrounding what the next wave around Digital / Social Media going to be, here is mine.

Translated, it means- The Systematic Web.

This is the next real wave on the internet. Actually, it is already happening in a way.

After Web 2.0, surely there will be no Web 3.0 (as in the term). Web 2.-0 as a term has also been less structured and open to interpretation in a lot of ways.

With Web 2.0 and the conversational wave on the internet, came the unorganized, free-for-all culture. Your digital conversations and footprints became haphazard, cumbersome and clunky.

The new paradigm and the next phase of the internet will focus on organization of this content.

The web 2.0 or conversational space will see a new level of sophistication. There will be better organization of content and more structured creation of content. Simply put, we will see the chaotic and unorganized nature of today’s conversational web become more Systematic.

We will see the emergence of the ‘Systematic Web’ or Web raised to the power of system . The name itself will lead to the meaning unlike ‘Web 1.0’, ‘Web 2.0’ or ‘Web 3.0’- which have been open to interpretation.

We have seen Twitter organization via lists- and Facebook organization with Live Vs News feeds. We have seen more privacy controls and better content organization by platforms themselves.

Not to mention the huge third party ‘organizers’ that have cropped up in the system. We have seen Friendfeed, Hootsuite, Tweetdeck- and so many others. Essentially what do they attempt to do? They organize content in a more meaningful way than the original platform owners. The Systematic Web.

Multiple platform fatigue syndrome? We have Posterous. Problems with finding the right conversations? We have many conversation monitoring services- that could systematize random conversations by various attributes- sentiments/influence/volume/topics- you name it. On the move?  Web 2.0 ratings not enough? Welcome Foursquare, Rummble,  Gowalla and what not.

Need to port your persona? Need one key to many sites? Easier than Feeds and Open ID? No worries. Facebook has Facebook connect, Google has Google Friend connect.

And now Google also has another one- Google Social Search.

Talking about search, It is not just Google- Twitter launched better search options a while ago- and included the ability to add an additional search modifier- location (and even sentiments) to the search (You could search ‘fit’ with a smiley to see positive or happy sentiments about fit and ‘fit’ with a for negative sentiments). Facebook too now allows for searching only your network or across Facebook.

This is not just Web 2.0. Think about it, it is all about Systematizing the present web. It is Web^sys

Systematization implies:

The next wave is already upon us- and it is not Augmented Reality (yet). Not sending ad messages by brain scanning. Not even the semantic web. It is the Systematic Web.

Web^sys

Think about it

Shalabh

I’m sure you must have heard the story of the Little Red Hen.

In a barnyard full of animals, there was a little red hen.

The Hen finds some wheat grains/seeds (lets say an entrepreneurial idea or a project concept) and wants to germinate it to grow into wheat plants so there could be a crop and everyone in the barn could eat the wheat.

She goes to every animal in the barn to sell the idea (team building/funding) and ask if anyone would be interested in joining in. All the animals decline- and so the hen does all the work herself.

Once the crop is done and bread is made, all the animals come in to eat it and demand a share.

Have you been through this?

Here is a beautiful modern adaption of this story here- my bits only in Italics:

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard (say looking for opportunities) until she uncovered some grains of wheat.

She called her neighbors and said, “If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?” (say, Concept development/fund generation stage)

“Not I,” said the cow.
“Not I,” said the duck.
“Not I,” said the pig.
“Not I,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen. (The prototype stage)

“Not I,” said the duck.
“Out of my classification,” said the pig.
“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

At last it came time to bake the bread. “Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.

“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.
“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.
“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.
“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen. (Getting the funding, product prototype, business plan, legalities, done- and the concept is now successfully launched)

She baked five loaves and held them up for her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share.

But the little red hen said, “No, I can eat the five loaves.”

“Excess profits!” cried the cow.
“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.
“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.
And the pig just grunted.

And they painted “unfair” picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

When the government agent came, he said to the little red hen, “You must not be greedy.”

“But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.

“Exactly,” said the agent. “That is the wonderful free enterprise system. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide their product with the idle.”

And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am grateful. I am grateful.”

But her neighbors wondered why she never again baked any more bread.

————————————————————————————————–

OK the last bit had communist overtones- but pretty much summarizes the attitude of many people. Has this happened to you? As a manager, entrepreneur or in your personal life?

Think about it

Shalabh

Thumbnail Image: http://orrinwoodward.blogharbor.com/Little%20Red%20Hen.bmp

In a previous post (recommended reading), I described a situation where a question was raised.

“Relationships imply deep commitments- so how could a brand develop one? And whether it makes sense to handover this relationship management to third parties?”

The underlying assumption was that relationships mean deep interpersonal interaction and commitments. This connotes a huge entry barrier for brands- because obviously brands want to understand and be sure- before they venture into any such strategic issue.

Well, one way to get over this barrier- is to have a more pragmatic approach towards relationships. If this is understood, we can probably breathe easier, get more stuff done- and procrastinate a little less. Because we can’t just wish it away.

The simple fact of life is that- for an individual, relationships OR expectations from different relationships are not the same.

And to get this point across, I plotted the various relationships that one person has.

Relationships. They are not linear. Neither are they completely hierarchical. They are an intense mish mash. And each has its own significance.

The best analogy could probably be notes of music. Each of them is diverse. Yet for an individual piece of music, each has its own significance (Just like an individual’s diverse relationships). Even though the notes are the same, the intensity might vary- from time to time (Just like an individual’s diverse relationships). If you don’t play them right at the right time- your music appears off. And they might be played together, at occasions. (Just like an individual’s balance and expectations from diverse relationships)

The individual entities in the matrix are self explained. Note that even in human to human relationships- the characteristics, duration of relationships, objectives and expectations vary. They are not exactly the same.

OK- human relationships are more complex than this.

How about a boss/mentor or teacher?
How about distant relatives?
How about children, spouses or parents of friends?
How about children, spouses or friends of siblings/parents?

How about a rock star or a film actor?

Well, there might be endless permutations- but if you look closely, the matrix could have proxies for more situations.

The key, however, is this: Brands do not need to develop relationships and get into commitments as a human to human close relationship.

People have different expectations from Brands ( or even Commercial interest entities). It is different from a friend or a spouse.

The point of contact could be short and intermittent. People understand a commercial entity- and have come to mould their expectations similarly.

Think about it.

Shalabh

iMedia connection just published this article- and as is usually the case, I thought of sharing this on my blog.

In case it interests you, my other Marketing and Digital Marketing related articles on iMediaConnection are here

I have changed it a bit for the search engines- so they don’t think I am lifting it from somewhere (they are robots after all) :p

The marketing services industry has been going through a huge upheaval the past few years, largely because of the digital medium.

In the last year, I have met many a senior ad/media agency folks who sought my thinking on how an (ad/media/PR) agency should be structured to meet the new market dynamics.

I have largely been a digital marketing professional but I have had the opportunity to work for many conventional agencies. I also have the good fortune to have worked in set-ups ranging from pure play digital agencies to conventional agencies and even in ‘integrated’ set-ups. And it has always got me thinking. If there ever was a possibility that I could start a marketing services agency, what is the philosophy that would guide it?

I have a preliminary philosophy and I am clear that the change should be incremental rather than radical, keeping many things the same.

But of course, I would also do many things differently — starting with doing away with the tag “agency.” (Always sounds like a reference to a ‘cooking gas cylinder’ shop to me) and starting a ‘conversation catalyst’. (No — the term ‘conversations’ are no longer just a ‘PR’ or ‘social media’ prerogative).

So why “conversation”? Simple. Because I believe that the purpose of a brand is to create involvement. And conversations beget involvement. On that, there’s more I’d like to elucidate.

Think of involvement as something happening through a conduit. This ‘conversation conduit’ is the ‘subject of conversation’. The conversation is centred around the conversation conduit. And so it becomes pertinent to understand the importance of this conduit. But don’t be mistaken. It is not just about buzz or viral or word-of-mouth only. It has a wider, almost all-encompassing scope. This philosophy can actually encompass all the disciplines that marketing agencies work on.

For example, conversations are also built on trust, which is earned over a period of time. One of the ways trust could be earned, in clinical marketing terminology, is through the discipline of CRM. So the label ‘conversation’ still fits. The difference is that it changes the mindset of this discipline. From being ‘database centric’ to a more evolved form.

Take another example — this time related to media. Paid media is the favourite bashing object of the alternate marketing evangelists. However, I do not think ‘attention seeking advertising’ (some call it interruption and some ‘display advertising‘) is dead or going to be dead anytime soon. It has its own role to play in the entire scheme of things. So the question then is: If we still are going to have print spaces and TV spots, (I do not equate web ads in the same space as they are more evolved and flexible) what is the fit with conversations? Right?

Well, the answer to this is that conversations don’t happen in vacuum. Conversations need mediums to attract and spread. Mediums offer opportunities to converse. Also to aid conversations in marketing, you need to consistently deliver the right messaging.

Well then, the issue of paid media gets taken care of too. The key philosophy to take home is that you do not plan media as the centerstage of your marketing plan. You plan media so it aids conversations.

Along the same lines, I could explain that the philosophy of conversation applies to other disciplines quite as well, like search marketing, direct marketing, and so on.

Not only does this incrementally change the ‘media/ad agency’ mindset, it even disrupts the ‘media-creative-PR’ silos that have existed for eons. By just focusing on ‘conversation opportunities’. So it probably establishes that ‘conversation’ is likely a game-changing philosophy that could result in cross discipline integration like messaging, media mix, CRM, PR, etc.

Imagine — we are not only talking ‘cross media’ integration. We are talking ‘cross discipline’ integration.

Coming to the second part of the term “conversation catalyst” — ‘catalyst’. By this term, I mean to point out that the ‘control factor’ in communication has becomes less important lately.

You might have heard this before, maybe in a different context. But in my mind, I am not very convinced that brands have lost ALL control. I think the role of the brand in conversations has not disappeared — it has just been changing. And that needs to be understood.

The brand today, steers the conversations, by creating favourable opportunities. Think of a unique panel discussion. The moderator (for want of a better word) of that panel discussion is the brand itself. And the panelists are the participants (formerly known as ‘target audience’). And here the panelists speak their minds (not the ones that you are used to attending). The funny thing is, imagine that the moderator is also the discussion point in that conversation! She does not just ask questions, rather aids the discussion by occasionally offering points of discussion. The panelists still speak their minds and can even question the moderator. (That is the way these discussions in conferences should be held, anyway.)

So then there it is — the brand is not a referee or a judge or a ring master. The brand is a catalyst. Again when I say brand, it is clear that the external manifestation of a brand lies many a times with the agencies, who create and buy ads for the brand in the hope of creating a positive predisposition.

If that fuelled your imagination, there is a lot more. The key points to take away are — conversation and catalysis — how they need not be the domain of one discipline. Rather these philosophies could power the philosophy of the ad agency of the future (Did I just say agency?).

In my next article, I will discuss the skill sets that I will plan for this marketing agency of the future. Till then, keep on Chasing The Storm.

Everyone has seen some version of “Did you know” series. The series aims to highlight some amazing facts about digital media. And puts all the trends in context.

I am embedding all the four videos from the series here:

Did you know version 4.o (courtsey Digital Trends)

Did you know version 3.0

Did you know version 2.0

Did you know version 1.0

Enjoy
Shalabh

Who will fuel the next wave of the growth of the Digital Media? Or more specifically- the Internet?

In an earlier post, I wondered if the new phase would still be fuelled by the Internet biggies. I also wondered if many small players are hugely susceptible to the might of the big guys. After all, the Internet biggies have been known to ‘eat up’ or acquire smaller promising companies.

Specially if you are a small player getting into their turf- they either acquire you, or (attempt to) kill you.

In this post, I turn the things a bit around. And argue in favor of these smaller companies.

To start with- there are signs that many big internet firms are precariously going the route of being “just another internet company”.

Or maybe these guys restart their growth story- with tremendous resources at their disposal. Only god knows!

Whatever it is, these are formidable forces. They fueled the growth of the Internet in the late 90s and 2000s- and grew exponentially in the range of product they owned- most of the times by the virtue of inorganic expansions.

You know them- the Googles, the Yahoos, the Amazons, the MSNs and the ebays.

The big question to be asked then is – are they able to play the same role in today’s ‘World Wide Web’ ecosystem as they have played over the last decade or so? With new players, new paradigms, escalating costs and cascading economies, what mantle are they going to wear?

Conglomerates by acquisition? Growth fuel-ers? Facilitators? Fence sitters? Or worse…hang on- there isn’t probably a “worse” than being ‘Fence Sitter’ for these guys.

If that scenario becomes a reality- these might be the possible causes:

Breakneck momentum and Survival of the fastest. Because anyone is giving a fight to everyone:
Vibes on the ground (and some in the stock market sentiments- where Apple has a market cap more than Google quite consistently now)- and yet some more in the virtual space- (with FaceBook and Twitter counting on conversation searches, and others like ‘bookmark search’ nibbling into their audience share etc) are indicators that in order to grow, Google and others might have to undergo another wave of serious innovation sooner than later.

It is not new to note that the big web brands have had various failures and limitations inspite of having deeper than deep coffers. Really.

Not only from the nimble small/independent companies that are causing disruption but competition is getting fiercer even within the biggies themselves.

It is a “Goliath against a David and another Goliath” match- where everyone is fighting everybody. Just like everywhere else. But this is the Internet. Battles here are fiercer- and shorter. These are the webDavids and the webGoliaths.

As an example of “Goliath against Goliath”, Apple is reportedly coming up with its own social network ( I can see the fanbois rejoicing)- with the threat of eating into audience attention span from Google properties & Microsoft and Yahoo eventually eating up search ad share.

And for the webDavids- I am surprised that so many nimble local map players have come up with such a variety of cool services, many ironically utilizing Google’s API. Apple’s iTunes is being challenged on its own turf- by small players launching competing apps for the iPhone!

Weak Products and weak marketing

The webDavids are slowly but surely gaining their footholds against the webGoliaths. They have not only been more nimble, with lesser cash burn rates, but in many cases even have also been able to develop great products- exploiting conspicuous gaps. (Twitter apparently had half of their earlier funds still in the bank when they received a fresh round of funding).

Also, for the webGoliaths, there have been surprising failures in the product development or product marketing front.

There are services not picking enough steam for the big players. Like VoIP forays by Google. It caused a bit of hype in the beginning and then died off. What was the unique disruption this service was causing? And why has is failed to retain the level of consumer interest?

And these are just web based business models – there are many forays by Google in print and radio that have proved quite disastrous (or ahead of their times). A case of trying too fast too soon.

Small does not mean- you can eat it

Traditionally, the big guys attempt to subvert smaller rivals by launching their own offerings against the smaller players. After all, big muscle means bigger market share right? Wrong.

PayPal-eBay: Ebay brought their own payment service to the market to kill payPal. It could not. PayPal became so popular, that eBay had to follow the philosophy of “If you can’t beat ‘em- BUY ‘em!”

Youtube-Google: Google had great reach and a repeat visitor base. YouTube was a baby. No match for the reach. Google Videos was launched- as  a me-too service at best at that point. Burnt some cash. And then ‘had to’ buy YouTube. Not bad. The small fish of yesterday- YouTube us the second most popular search engine on the Internet today.

There are many more examples- and I’m not even talking about the new Davids and Goliaths (Facebook trying to acquire Twitter- finally buying small FriendFeed, etc)

The never ending story continues. Grow big fast, subvert, kill.The mantras of survival in the internet ecosystem.

While everyone’s back to furious product development (igoogle social network, Google waves, Bing, conversation search, social shopping, etc) it is truly the survival of the fastest here.

Think about it.

Shalabh

(@shalabhpandey on twitter)

This is a sequel to the first part.

I had this with me for almost two months now, but only publishing it now.

Again, this is not meant to be about apocalypse or the end of the world or shit like that.

These are just a few issues that I think will change the the way things work- across the globe- in times to come- and are going to have an impact on every individual across the globe.

In the first part I discussed:

Rise of the improbables: Non mainstream countries getting more aggressive and getting equipped with warheads enough for starting collateral damage (I was hoping someone would argue in favor or extend the discussion)

New Germs with more reach

The growing insensitivity and intolerance of common individuals and society

Here’s the next list:

I think the world is at a tipping point

Terrorist groups: Welcome to the jungle

They are an age old issue you might say. But here’s the difference: In no previous decades they had the power of the Internet, the power of mobility, and Worse- the power of acceptance. They are getting funded, have a complex network, access to educated recruits- and even acceptance amongst some sects.

The noise, glamour and perceived successes surrounding some- give rise to newer ones- motivated by money or fanned by socio-religious inequality/superiority complexes.

Needs sustained military, diplomatic and economic efforts to contain and reform.

The economic recession-Money for nothing

It has definitely been the worst financial disaster my generation has witnessed. Actually, in Asia it might be the worst economic disaster ever. We were too ‘secluded’ in the 30s to have witnessed the Great Depression in its severity, with many countries still under western colonial rule. In the later economic downturns the severity was restricted to sectors and mitigated due to less interdependence with western counterparts.

But This is it. Money has eroded, jobs have gone, lives have changed. And the world is never ever going to be the same again. We can just hope it was a bad pill to swallow and we all will be healthy soon. Amen.

Global Warming: The heat is on.

Now you don’t have to be Al Gore to realize that it is here and it is now. Apart from the increasing unpredictability and intensity of the normal everyday weather across the world, I got a taste of it visiting the glacier mouth of the Ganges river in India. Apparently it has receded about 10 km in less than a century. And more in the previous 25 years than the 75 years before that.

A latest study here from Nat Geo says the CO2 levels have been the highest in two million years!

It is happening fast and we are experiencing the impact within our lifetime. We have started actioning- lets hope it is not too little too late.

The world has changing and continues to change.

A simple example sometimes makes me think: when we were kids, we had not even heard words like H1N1, SAARS, Dengue, Chickenguniya, ponzi schemes, global warming etc etc. Or maybe it is due to the media explosion. God knows.

thumbnail courtsey: Flickr

Chris Anderson delivering  a talk on the theme of his latest book ‘Free’ courtsey ZDNet.

Chris Anderson, author of “Free: The Future of a Radical Price,” discusses how different companies use the free-to-premium, or freemium model to not only make money, but often keep customers at a higher rate than fully paid services. There are many economies–ones of status, time, information and more–and the trick is to get people to trade their money for one of them

I will probably post on his most famous and of course more ground breaking book ‘The Long Tail’ in some time.

Meanwhile, you can follow the links and maybe follow an excellent interview by Hugh McLeod of GapingVoid.

Have been allowing access to full RSS feeds to ChasingTheStorm posts. However, just shifted to partial feeds. And not without reason. Not because of the reasons that are commonly known to abet listing partial feeds.

I just had an article published on iMediaconnection this week and sharing the unedited version  here.

There has been a lot of talk on the web on why you should allow Full Feed access to your content.

Being a voracious consumer of content myself- especially from Blogs, I subscribe to hundreds of feeds, consuming a variety of content quickly through a single interface- my feed reader. I refer to this phenomenon as “skimming and skipping”- and you will know in a moment why it has nothing to do with milk or ropes.

However, I realize many a times- I do like reading something off the actual environment of the blog.

Many of the feeds you as an audience subscribe to are ‘full’ feeds (allowing complete content access without visiting the site), and many others- only partial. Teasers with a summary of content- enticing you to click on the story leading you to the main site. No matter how wonderfully tacky that sounded, it has its merits. And it is not to do with being more attractive to advertisers.

And more than that, there are myriad other reasons why I would advocate considering the use of partial feeds than full feeds- and take a U turn from what many evangelists advocate.

My reasons in favor of partial feeds:

1.     Less engagement with on-site elements: In my case, the blogzine- ChasingTheStorm.com has multiple ways to engage- on the site itself.

o    Audience can get access to “related posts” and many other ways to interact with the content by means of plug-ins. Those cannot be utilized at the feed reader stage

o    The sidebars on-site have interesting videos and slideshare documents embedded through widgets. Audience don’t get to use them if consuming content from a reader

o    Large volume of content usage through readers implies that the time you spent sourcing all that cool multimedia content (on sidebar widgets) is a waste. This also implies you have fewer insights into what kind of content are audience spending more time on

2.     Shitloads of time analyzing: I use Feedburner for burning feeds and analyzing feed related data. Though it has interesting stats dashboards, it adds an extra layer of evaluation over and above my existing on-site blog insights tool (Google Analytics). Though I live and love these things, it takes shitloads of time to marry data and come up with a meaningful insight.

3.     Limited Content Insights: Again, many feed pimping tools give stats on ‘views’ and the ‘clickthroughs’ ( I’m talking ‘post centric’ stats) these are good but not without issues

o    Because you publish full feeds, audience skims and skips through content. There is no inclination to take any action- leading to lesser clickthroughs-less site visits mean less meaningful/deep insights. Simple.

o    Lack of deeper stats leaves the data with limited insights. Time spent, bounce rates, content drilldown and navigation summary data are important to content publishers (yes I said ‘Bounce rates’- ask me why they might be valuable even for a blog)

o    Many people use Google reader as feed reader. And if you use Google Anlaytics, you will probably know that clicks from Google reader are listed under Google.com/referral. Ditto from other Google properties (except search)- complicating referral analysis further

4.     Sharing: Audience’s ability to forward or share content from a reader is rather limited. Even though many readers now allow this as an optional facility- they are not used often- because of the mindset of consuming maximum content in the least time. Skimming and Skipping.

5.     Comment Engagement: Many feed readers do not automatically have a commenting facility from within the reader- also the sheer environment where you are ‘skimming and skipping’ through content is a barrier to commenting

6.     Social Proof: I don’t burn my comments- which means there is lesser ‘Social Proof’ for people to comment. Often people see other comments and get motivated to comment.

So now you know. It is not the advertising- as is the case made out to be. It is not driving traffic to the site so I could get advertising dollars.The reasons are not ‘inside out (helping the blogger and sacrificing readers interests) but actually- it helps the readers

Partial feeds elicit better interaction with the blog, give access to a better environment, audience get a better feel of the blogger personality and it just drives an overall more fulfilling experience.

Do you burn full feeds or partial?

twitter.com/shalabhpandey

thumbnail: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lumaxart/2308010674/sizes/s/

Got my hands on this book- aptly called The Idea Book . Probably my first book review on ChasingTheStorm and an apt way to start a category considering this blog is also about Ideas and memes. Also, I am pleasantly surprised at the fact that I already practice a lot that is there in the book. Starting with documenting my ideas in a notebook- which has been a habit since childhood.

I do read a lot of books- albeit with my fragmented attention span- I usually take more time than others to finish them. And sometimes I read more than one book at a time. Will soon start listening to ebooks heavily- is what my guess is- they are more portable and handy while traveling. That is after I decide on which portable device to buy for that purpose.

The Idea Book is exactly that- a book on inspiring ideas and anecdotal evidences. You can visit the official page here.

Written by Fredrik Haren of Interesting.org and generously sent to me by Bastian Doehling- the book’s tagline says it all-

150 pages about ideas and 150 empty pages to write your own ideas.

The book is about being inspired and encourages you to write down your ideas. Inside the book.

Now one thing that is great about this book is – you don’t need to start it and finish it at one go. It works even if continuity is not maintained. Because it does not read like a story.

Read it, get inspired- jot down thoughts and do it all over again.

If you want to have a flavor of the book, a preview is available here.

Some of my favorite quotes/anecdotes from the book:

• Eat this: Edison had an Idea quota. A minor invention every 10 days and a major invention every 6 months!
• Have the courage to invent new words in order to invent new ideas. Now this is something that comes intrinsically to me. Read more of this blog to know what words have I invented
• High technology obeys the iron law of revolution. The more you change. you have to be willing to accept the fact that in this game the rules keep changing. (Bill Joy): So true of the industry I represent.
• Philosophers have only interpreted the world. The point however, is to change it. (Marx): ChasingTheStorm?
• I’m sure you have ‘intelligent’ people in your companies. The kinds that shoot down ideas and enthusiasm effectively by pointing what would not work. 2 quotes:
  • Every Fool can see what is wrong. See what is good in it (Churchill)
  • Imagination is more important than knowledge. (Einstein)
• There is a natural opposition to anything they havent thought of themselves (Barnes Walles; Page 97; The Idea book)
• If you don’t tell me how tall your house is, I’ll beat you to death with my barometer… (Ask me about this story)
• Everything that can be invented- has been invented (1899); Heavier than air flying machines are impossible (1895)
• Nothing is done. Everything in the world remains to be done or done over…(1931, Lincoln Steffens): In contrast to the previous quote, this is so true of the new world order that beckons us post the downturn
  

And many many more such gems. Already spent enough time and hopefully inspired you a bit in the process.

Now my part on suggestions for the book. Some thoughts on how could the book be more innovative:

• The book has inspiration and pages to jot down ideas. But what is missing- is a writing instrument. What would be really cool is -an innovative pen with the book- maybe one hanging with the bookmark thread. People end up reading books while traveling and- in case you get inspired, you need to have that pen around.

• Another more innovative way could be- have a carbon paper over each empty page- so you don’t even need a pen or pencil- any object (including finger tips!) would do for a quick jot down of ideas in that moment of inspiration. Very useful for those who get ideas in the bathroom

• Also, from a user experience perspective- I think the empty pages could be clubbed together. Helps in better continuity of ideas if they overflow from one page to the other and dives into the reader psychology. As of now each article is followed by a few empty pages- which makes it looks like there is an ‘exercise’ to do after each chapter in a text book (though it is not so)

They have a contest on the site- where people could submit photos with the book- and there are prizes to be won every week .

Meanwhile, I leave you with this TED talk as an apt way to end this post. Enjoy!

And let me know if you need some inspiring quotations. I am armed.

Cheers

Shalabh (twitter.com/shalabhpandey)

Note: The link to buy from Amazon has my Associates ID

Dell Swarm Social Media Singapore

Continued from the previous post,  this is about learning from the Dell Swarm initiative. The fact that we are spending time on this, does imply that it is a great initiative by itself.

Also the attempt is to bring forth focused and pointed issues- not beating around the bush. And hopefully search for some answers. So please do not just lurk- but contribute- in any small way you can. Share or comment on the post. It does not matter if you are not in the marketing profession. Common sense will do just fine. Even better.

So here are some issues that I could find with the Dell Swarm initiative:

• Consumer Insight:
  • How people buy: Demand generation marketing excels in, well, driving demand. Most of the time- through deals and offers. And truly they work quite well too! So  “why not create another opportunity for potential customers to get more deals and discounts”- seems to be the thought behind this initiative. Fine and dandy. But apart from just the price point, there are factors at work that this initiative overlooks a bit. Like the  process of online buying and the consumer expectations as I attempt to point out below.
  • The process: Remember- on Dell Swarm- you don’t just have to join OR spread the word amongst your friends- you have to place a commitment to buy- and so do your friends. You need to find people in need of buying the computer NOW with you. For getting the maximum advantage, you would need 14 such people along with you. You could stand for elections in your country if you could sway that many people in Singapore to part with their thousand bucks.
  • Immediacy: People buying online using your site have already made up their minds to buy. And they want immediate gratification. Would you wait for 3-4 days to get to see how much have you ended up on the discount-and then wait for the usual product shipping time lag?
  • Customization: People on the main Dell site could customize their orders. Even if many don’t, they have a perceived advantage- and control over what they buy. That advantage does not seem in play here.

Possible Solution: They might have thought of this already- and the solution seems to be setting alerts on upcoming swarms. That is good- but how about extending it – to purchases from their site or even offline? This might be one million dollar advice ;P No really- in more ways than one. Ask me how.

• Limited machines on a swarm
  • At any point of time, there are about 2 swarms listed active. Users simply don’t have too much choice

Possible Solution: Even if there are two machines, they seem to be chosen by the Dell staff- would CrowdSourcing add to the enthusiasm and get more activation? Worth a try.

• The real value (of discounts)
  • I saw some discounts range from 5% (1 person) to about 11% (getting 15 people to buy that including you). Not bad if you think. But is this what the customers would get at the physical shopping counter/retailer as well? Is the effort of getting 14 people to commit to buy a product worth saving $100?

Possible solution: There is a reason most brand related contests are dumb. (Who composed Thriller- Michael JackDaughter, Michael Jackass or Michael Jackson? Answer and win a Golden glove) And the higher the reward, the greater the participation. It makes everyone think they are smart- and their chances of winning something are high. Or the reward is worth their time. Timeless tactics. Never fail. Just like the girl in a bikini. So, in the swarm, make the ‘people limit’ lower (public does not care about margins that you calculate at the backend. No really) and the discounts higher.

• Less repeat opportunities to engage
  • What happens after you buy? Your interaction with the site gets over immediately.

Possible Solution: These customers present a huge huge opportunity for business- perhaps bigger than the ones who buy from the main site. Why? Because they could contact the same people in their earlier swarm to buy a cross sold product- and further induce them to buy again. Now THAT is community and Social Reference Marketing (term coined by Shalabh Pandey ).

I think once these solutions are undertaken, Dell could use this as an asset rather than building this as another property to drive traffic to- part of a support group of such initiatives- that help each other- and more importantly deliver better what Dell does best- drive demand.

Cheers

Shalabh

Thumbnail courtsey: Flickr