Archive for September, 2009

  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • >

Give great writing its due

By Leo Valiquette

“I have made this letter longer than usual, only because I did not have time to make it shorter.”

Whether this quote is more appropriately attributed to Mark Twain or Blaise Pascal is beside the point. What matters is that it aptly sums up the delightful, frustrating and fulfilling struggle that is the art of writing.

Whether you are an amateur writer of fiction intent on improving your craft, or a communications professional subject to the scrutiny and criticism of those who may fail to appreciate your clever turns of phrase, one observation of Twain’s still holds true: “A man cannot be comfortable with his own approval.”

As a communications professional accustomed to my approval of what I produce being secondary to that of the client, I often hear comments like, “This is what we want to say, but we’ll leave it to you to polish it up and make it sound good,” or, “I don’t know how we can get all that across in (blank) number of words.”

My job is to create an effective piece of writing intended to serve a specific purpose and achieve a desired result for people who lack the time, or the skill, to do it for themselves. They recognize the value I bring to the table, while at the same time, I appreciate that what I am doing has a direct impact on their image and brand. It is a collaborative effort that must balance creative freedom with the dollars-and-cents demands of lead generation and business development.

But at the heart of this process, regardless of how many other people are involved and providing their input, there remains the individual writer toiling in solitude to string words together in a manner that will engage the reader, convey critical information and spur them to action in as concise a manner as possible. Mastery of this skill requires a natural talent that must be honed through a process of lifelong learning, constant practice and a humble appreciation for the work of a good editor.

Being able to write effectively, on demand, to further someone else’s agenda, is a talent years in the making. It is a professional service that should be given its due and recognized for the value it provides. It should not be regarded as a commodified service. Writers are a dime a dozen, but great writers are in another class entirely. There is a profound difference between derivative cut-and-paste recycling of content and distilling a mass of information from numerous sources into a cohesive and concise form that furthers understanding.

So next time you find yourself in need of a good writer to support your marketing and public relations objectives, remember that you are looking for a partner who will bring unique strengths to the table and work with you to achieve a successful execution. And most importantly, great writers are worth the money, but not everyone who charges a premium rate is a great writer.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

The secret to PR success, exposed!

By Linda Forrest

I sent out a news release last week for NetCentric Technologies, an Ottawa company launching a new product, their PDF Accessibility Wizard, an MS Office add-in that makes documents accessible to people with disabilities.

I spent spent considerable time developing the right media list, one that contained many niche and specialty publications, so I knew the targets I’d be going after were appropriate and likely to be interested in this new product. Now, NetCentric’s PAW is not page one news and certainly will not be covered by the mainstream media. However, it offers real value, especially to the government technology crowd who are mandated by law to make their documents accessible, and a product brief or technology spotlight, customer case study or product review in a specialty pub catering to this audience would serve the company very well.

Launch day rolled around, the release was sent out, and I began to follow up with the highest value of the media targets to whom we sent the release. Phone calls, emails, Tweets, whatever channel our targets were using, I attempted to make contact. As sometimes happens, it was really (and I mean REALLY) difficult to make contact. For whatever reason, it was really challenging to get hold of people. In a moment of despair, I jokingly Tweeted that perhaps people don’t answer their phones anymore…!

It was time to pull out the big guns. If I was going to get some worthwhile traction for my client, I was going to have to resort to the time-honored, secret weapon that we PR consultants absolutely know will result in coverage.

Much like magicians who condemn one of their own for revealing trade secrets, I’m sure my colleagues in the PR business are going to be terribly chagrined if I expose the secret to success in PR. It’s something we’ve held dear for all of our years in the business, the surefire way to get a response from media targets.

Are you ready? Here goes…

It’s persistence. Tenacity. KEEPING AT IT.

I know, it’s not terribly exciting, but that’s the secret to success. Hard work. Though as my favourite teacher always used to say, “work smart, not hard.” So, rather, it’s smart work … with a little elbow grease thrown in.

There is no magic bullet in PR, it’s just a lot of work, putting the right resources in front of the right targets, in whatever format makes the most sense. Where the worst of our industry all too often falls down is where the rubber hits the road. The release is sent, if it doesn’t click immediately, that’s the end of it. “We sent it out, the rest is up to the media.” Wrong.

If it didn’t click immediately, why not? Perhaps, as in this case, the publications being targeting are part-time propositions, or the person who typically writes about such things is on holiday, or is focused on a deadline, or myriad other good reasons. Use common sense, obviously; don’t fill the inboxes of editors and reporters with umpteen emails and voicemails from you. Rather, be persistent without being annoying.

I’ve had some really high-value conversations in the last eight hours, ones that not only secured my client coverage that will no doubt move their market, but also that wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t kept at it. Because of the research we do at the outset of a campaign, I knew that I had the right information for the right targets; it was just a matter of time before it all came together.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Show me the money

guest blogger2 Show me the money

By Tim Redpath

(Tim Redpath heads up Train of Thoughts, working with clients on strategic marketing, campaigns and communications as well as trying to measure value from marketing budgets. He is an occasional lecturer at the Sprott School of Business and is vice chair of the Ottawa Chamber of Commerce.)

Eighty-four percent of business professionals using social media don’t bother to measure its ROI, according to eMarketer. Almost half said they did not even know whether the social media tools they were using had ROI measurement capabilities.

To me, this is a sad indictment of marketing professionals like me. We have jumped in to play with some shiny new toys but are not taking the time to invest in proving their worth.

The whole point of marketing is to effect change – change in buying behaviour, change in knowledge, change in attitude. But if we can’t measure these changes, how can we know what has worked?

I am as guilty as the next marketing professional. I have architected many marketing programs over the years and been consumed with marketing, promotional and communication tools. Measurement has been based on criteria as varied as number of customers engaged, number of mail outs, column inches of media coverage and a general warm feeling. Barely a chart or a metric to be found.

Marketing’s budget gets hit hard in a downturn when it can’t prove that it adds value. Bluff and bluster buys you only so much time; eventually, in the words of Jerry Maguire’s client, you have to “Show me the money.”

Google AdWords has gifted marketing a remarkable measurement tool. If you can’t determine value from your Google spend, then you need to find another day job. Other tools, like some social media elements, are trickier. Sometimes you can fold them in to a broader measure of, say, aided-unaided brand awareness; sometimes it’s just plain tough. But it behoves us, as marketing professionals, to try and justify our budget.

Just because programs are hard to measure does not necessarily mean that we should not do them. White papers are great thought-leadership tools but not always easy to measure in terms of value. You can track the number of downloads off a web page, number given out at a trade show or number of mentions in media. None of these is perfect but they give a peripheral sense of value. For the cost of producing a white paper, they should be a no-brainer for most high-tech companies.

With that in mind I have a matrix that compares the cost of a program with how easy it is to measure value. National print ads with an easy call to action are an example of something you can spend tens of thousands of dollars on and easily drive a measure of value. Conversely, you can drop hundreds of thousands on a sponsorship program and be left judging long-term value on gut feel and experience.

Direct mail is always a favourite in the easy-to-do-and-easy-to prove-value quadrant, while brochures are hard to measure but not that expensive.

social media measurement1 Show me the money

As marketing professionals, we have to justify ourselves and our budgets, all the time. Don’t worry about the brochures, pick the big ticket-big impact items first and work your way down the list. We have no excuse for not trying.

Technorati Tags: ,

Marketing in a downturn: how the best do it

By Danny Sullivan

We’ve written on marketing in a downturn a few times over the past couple of years - unfortunately, it’s a topic that is close to everyone right now. But I had to come back to the subject again after reading an excellent and insightful article by Beth Comstock, CMO of GE in BusinessWeek.

It’s very refreshing to hear such a frank discussion about how one of the world’s biggest companies is ramping up its marketing spend to capture more market share and position itself for the inevitable recovery. At inmedia, we have long advocated using the downturn as a time to increase the marketing volume rather than cut back, but all too often our words have fallen on deaf ears.

It’s understandable that companies look at marketing as something that can easily be cut back on when times are tough, but such a reaction fails to take into account the immediate opportunity that exists to gain a marketing foothold over other cost-cutting competitors, and does not look beyond the downturn to the time when they will need to be well-positioned to take advantage of the recovery.

Comstock’s example of Priceline outspending the competition to post an 82% increase in profits and improved market share should be enough to convince anyone that there is value to be gained from marketing in a downturn.

Some might say it’s easier for the biggest companies to remain bold during a downturn, but what about those whose revenues are a fraction of GE’s? I believe that the principle remains the same – going silent can only cause one to lose business and market share. The truth is that plenty of business remains to be won in a downturn, and canny marketing investment can help capture that business, while simultaneously ensuring a company’s readiness for the recovery.

Technorati Tags: , ,

The news industry’s PR problem, and why it shouldn’t be bailed out

newspapers rip The news industrys PR problem, and why it shouldnt be bailed out

By Linda Forrest

I read a controversial piece yesterday on Mediabistro. Apparently, President Obama has been quoted as saying that he’s open to looking at bailing out the newspaper industry. My personal opinion is that a bailout isn’t what the newspaper industry needs, for reasons I’ll get into shortly. But first, I’d like to talk about the news industry’s PR problem.

A direct quote from the president said the following, “I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding.”

What this says to me is that the news industry has a PR problem, is poorly understood by even the highest office in the land (one whose media-savvy campaign largely propelled him into the Oval Office) and is struggling to find its identity as news formats shift from dead trees to zeros and ones.

There is a common misconception that online news is strictly commentary, often characterized by the opinion-based content to which President Obama refers. Reliable and intelligent news is well researched, fact checked and placed in context, regardless of whether it’s online or off. Until this fundamental understanding is well communicated and well understood, and until the industry adheres to its own best practices, the news business will remain the subject of much consternation.

As to why I don’t believe the news industry should get a bailout? I had a ringside seat for the spectacular downfall of the music industry. Having studied the music industry at two post-secondary institutions (yes, Virginia, there really is rock and roll school), I learned about its outmoded revenue model and watched as the record labels clamored to find alternative revenue streams. In short, the industry failed to adapt to the consumer’s wants and needs and so those consumers simply circumvented the record companies.

In much the same way, consumers of news no longer want or expect to wait until tomorrow to see the news in print; rather, they want the news when they want it. The journalistic integrity of marquee outlets remains strong, whether people are consuming their news in print or online. Some of our clients’ most important media targets are strictly online; this does not diminish their impact nor their influence on the purchasing decisions of those holding the purse strings.

Rather than bail out an industry so that it can maintain an antiquated way of doing things, let these outlets find new and current methods for getting their product out to the consumer. Let’s hope the news industry learns something from the shoddy example set by the music industry that clearly missed the boat.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

“Did your Rogers iPhone on the Rogers network work at the Rogers Centre tonight? Mine didn’t.”

taber no cell phones allowed 150x150 “Did your Rogers iPhone on the Rogers network work at the Rogers Centre tonight?  Mine didn’t.”

By Linda Forrest

I dipped back into my former life for a night last week when I went to Toronto to see U2 at the Rogers Centre. It was incredible.

We were lucky enough to have general admission tickets that enabled us to get as close as we wanted to to the stage, which was close. In order to do so, though, we waited in line outside of the venue for most of the day. Thank heaven for the PDA or it would have been considerably more challenging to fill the time. Liveblogging the lineup would have been far too boring for anyone not there (it was pretty boring in the lineup itself) but it was great to be able to check emails, Tweet when the mood struck, and catch up on online news.

When my phone worked, that is.

Having a Rogers iPhone on the Rogers network outside (and later inside) the Rogers Centre, one would think that reception would be stellar, that the data network would be lightning fast. One would be wrong.

The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if the fact that Blackberry was sponsoring the U2 tour impacted the service. Anecdotally, those attending the show who were using Blackberries didn’t seem to have the same frustrating lack of network access that we on the Rogers network did. Good to know that Elvis Costello could check his emails on his Blackberry with impunity while the rest of us with a Rogers account had to be contented with just basking in the glow of the many Rogers’ logos that surrounded us, rather than a functional network.

More than once in surveying round-ups and reviews of the show, I came across sentiments similar to “Did your Rogers iPhone on the Rogers network work at the Rogers Centre tonight?  Mine didn’t.” The company, which struggles with its reputation as a reliable service provider, something we’ve addressed at other times on this blog, missed a golden opportunity to knock it out of the park, a park that was filled with 58,000 U2 fans, two nights in a row, that in today’s era of social media and pervasive user-created content would be sharing their experience at the show, something that extends beyond just the performance of the band itself.

Image: Open Clip Art Library.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Neptec: A pony that knew better than to rely on one trick

teb 300x91 Neptec: A pony that knew better than to rely on one trick

By Leo Valiquette

When Iain Christie, president of Neptec Design Group, took the stage this morning as the keynote speaker at OCRI’s first Technology Executive Breakfast of the fall season, he made one thing clear: he wouldn’t presume to tell his audience how they should run their business, since it was challenge enough to run his own.

Nonetheless, as he shared anecdotes of the lessons learned over Neptec’s almost 20-year evolution from a one-trick pony whose continuance relied on the “stroke of a bureaucratic pen” to a more diversified technology play, it was clear that certain fundamentals crucial to business success apply no matter the industry; they simply manifest in different ways.

Neptec’s big break came in the early 1990s, when it developed an Advanced Space Vision System for NASA to help astronauts assemble the International Space Station. While this crucial contract for the company generated spinoff business, by the start of this decade, Neptec was challenged by the simple fact that it was still living from program to program with one dominant customer — obviously not the best way to build a sustainable company over the long term.

And while additional opportunities have come from NASA, not the least of which is the 3D Laser Camera System now used to inspect the Space Shuttle exterior for damage after launch, Neptec has diversified its expertise in intelligent three-dimensional data collection and processing for multiple applications in the defence and industrial automation markets.

Iain shared the following lessons that have come of the company’s growing pains and emphasized that it is still far better to learn from one’s own experience than from the mistakes of others:

1. Always have a backup plan. Before you jump in and claim to have the solution to a problem, make certain you have a complete understanding of its dimensions and its constraints. ”You’ll get a lot further ahead.”

2. Never let them see you sweat. “Amateurs talk about technology, professionals talk about process.” Technology is great, but if there is not a proven process to govern implementation and operation, and effectively troubleshoot any problems, the best technology in the world will not yield the desired result. You must be prepared for the unexpected.

3. The Perfect is the enemy of The Good Enough. In one instance with NASA, Neptec went from concept to a fully realized system that flew in space in only 16 months. The key from the outset was having a clear and unambiguous objective statement of what they had to achieve. The team had to refrain from the temptation to exhaust time and resources on making something that was already good enough even better. It was an exercise in distinguishing the “truly important” from the “merely urgent.”

4. Stick to your strengths. When the Neptec team embarked on its campaign to diversify its customer base, the key was not to chase after what the market wanted, but to instead remain true to its core strengths and focus on opportunities where it could deliver value to the customer. In other words, find problems they could solve with a solution the target market was willing to buy and could afford, rather than attempting to muscle in where larger and better-funded competitors were already well-established.

5. What gets measured gets done. Case in point: Iain was swimming against the current with his management team trying to argue in favour of expanding the workforce. The central issue was Neptec’s utilization rate: how much of each worker’s time was actually being applied to billable client work. Iain put the spotlight on it, but his managers on their own initiative tackled it and staff efficiency shot up in a matter of weeks. Which led to his next point: as the leader, his job is to ensure the management team is focused on addressing the right problem, set goals, then get out of the way and let them figure out the solution. He should not get bogged down in the day-to-day operational stuff, but . . .

6. Stay focused on what’s next. Change isn’t always desirable, but it is inevitable. While it is easy to fall into the trap of never looking past the end of the current project, or the current fiscal quarter, the person at the top must have their attention focused on what’s just over the horizon to maintain growth and profitability.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Perspective, common sense break out at Social Media Breakfast

By Francis Moran

I went to Ottawa’s Social Media Breakfast this morning and an intelligent session on strategic customer engagement broke out.

The above paragraph is the calmest of the leads that came to mind as I drove home from the breakfast; the others were far more excitable, reflecting the deep personal enthusiasm I felt after hearing a presentation on social media tools that put them in common-sense perspective. This is a sharp departure from past SMBOttawa speakers who have presented social media as the salvation of all things.

I knew right from the opening slide, “Your social media strategy won’t save you,” that this morning’s speaker, author, entrepreneur and self-confessed Twitter addict Tara Hunt (@missrogue), was going to be something quite different. What I didn’t know was that she was not only going to dynamite the worst of all the social-media-as-brave-new-world myths I have become so tired of hearing, but that she was also going to put the customer back at the centre of the whole value chain.

I live-tweeted a few of her better lines, as did others at the session, and you can see her whole presentation here. In a nutshell, however, Tara told us:

  • Social media is a tool, not a strategy.
  • Social media has not changed the world, it has not changed how we connect with other human beings, and it most certainly has not changed how we decide to buy, or not to buy, something.
  • The customer must be at the centre of every effective business strategy; if it doesn’t make the customer happy, don’t do it.
  • Social media has a role, potentially an incredibly potent role, to play in influencing each stage of the purchasing-decision process.
  • And she finished with very practical advice on exactly how social media tools can be deployed as part of a customer-centric campaign.

In one tidy presentation, then, Tara managed to hit on what seems to be my two most frequently raised topics these days:

  • Social media is not a brave new world; the fundamentals still apply.
  • Customer satisfaction is the only sustainable competitive differentiator.

Thanks for not drowning in the Kool Aid, Tara.

One fascinating side note: Early on in her presentation, Tara used Comcast as an example of a company that seems to be doing great outreach via Twitter but still letting down their customers and creating all kinds of lousy customer-service issues. Practically no sooner had she referenced Frank Eliason, who tweets as @comcastcares, than Frank himself was weighing in via Twitter, insisting that customer satisfaction was up 9% at the U.S. cable giant and offering to join a debate with Tara!

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Clarify your mandate and hold fast to it

By Leo Valiquette

In the world of corporate communications, maintaining brand integrity is of prime concern. Consumer loyalty, after all, is invariably tied to the perceptions and expectations that have been created in the marketplace. One need only revisit the classic boondoggle that was New Coke for a clear example of what happens when consumers come to expect one thing from a major brand and get another.

As a one-time museologist, I find it fascinating how these same group dynamics can manifest in a much more dramatic, even combative, form when applied to a hallowed institution such as a national museum or other historical venue. On today’s grim anniversary, the National September 11 Memorial and Museum in New York City, due to open in 2013, is defending its decision to display written quotations drawn from so-called “martyrdom” videos made by the hijackers who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, along with witness testimonials.

As reported by Reuters, museum president Joe Daniels told reporters the exhibit would present the facts, focusing on “what happened on that day, why it happened, what does it mean to live in a 9/11 world.”

“Let the perpetrators speak for themselves,” he said, adding, “That’s a powerful and important thing that visitors to this museum need to hear — bearing witness to the actual testimonials of those who committed the atrocities.”

Personally, I applaud the decision by museum officials to stick to their guns despite bitter opposition from victims’ families. But arguing the merits of why it is vitally important for such an important venue to present history in a manner that is as comprehensive, balanced and factual as possible is a little off topic for our purposes here.

What is important is that the museum is presenting a clear and strong message about what it is doing and why. Four years before it even opens, it is establishing in the public consciousness a clear idea of what it is, what purpose it will serve and how it intends to fulfill that mandate by openly acknowledging and addressing the concerns of critics and opponents. It would appear, on the surface at least, that somebody is doing something right in the museum’s PR department.

It is a far more admirable approach than the recent screw up that almost was the reenactment of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, in which an attempt to re-stage this crucial event in the history of the continent on its 250th anniversary died a messy death thanks to vehement opposition from Quebec’s sovereignist lobby.

Even those who thought that reenacting such a contentious event was never a good idea criticized the manner in which it died. As NDP Deputy Leader Thomas Mulcair told CTV in February, “I think that it was a mistake from the beginning and it’s a good thing that it was cancelled. But the problem is it’s being cancelled now for the wrong reasons, because of threats of violence. And it’s never a good reason to cancel something just because you’re afraid.”

A couple of years ago, the Canadian War Museum faced a controversy of its own over an exhibit about the actions of Allied Bomber Command during the Second World War. One particular display panel raised a quite valid point about the limited strategic benefits of a bombing campaign against targets in Germany that resulted in hundreds of thousands of fatalities. Though it was determined that the content of the exhibit was factually correct and simply misinterpreted, the museum nonetheless bowed to pressure from outraged veterans groups and changed the text.

When dealing with material of such a sensitive nature, some measure of controversy, and compromise, is inevitable. But going which ever way the wind blows runs the risk of eroding an organization’s credibility. It’s crucial for any course of action to have been put to an exhaustive test to ensure it fits within the organization’s mandate and has a rock solid defence ready for any PR storm that may arise before it is put into play.

While the ultimate consequences of the National September 11 Memorial & Museum’s decision to exhibit those martyrdom quotations are not yet known, the clear and strong message that museum staff have laboured to convey is certainly the right move.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Startup boot camp, fewer events form The Ottawa Network’s new season

the ottawa network Startup boot camp, fewer events form The Ottawa Networks new season

By Francis Moran

A weekend-long, competitive startup boot camp in October that will see the winning team take away $5,000 in seed funding was the most interesting piece of a coherent new programming line up announced last night by The Ottawa Network, the city’s grassroots networking club for the technology sector.

The startup camp, which will be repeated in the spring, was the second of four “program pillars” revealed by TON president Rick O’Connor. The first pillar, Network, will see TON continue to hold business networking and educational events, although at two a month, these will happen only half as frequently as last year’s somewhat over-ambitious weekly schedule. The third pillar, Finance, will feature a repeat of last year’s popular Founders and Funders dinners that saw angels and venture capitalists rub shoulders for an evening with entrepreneurs looking for funding. Details of the final pillar, Grow, will come later.

TON will also start charging a membership fee for the first time since it was founded in 2001 by a cohort of down-sized refugees of the telecom crash who gathered together to commiserate and help each other found new ventures and find new jobs. General membership will cost $25 per year in a move O’Connor said the organization hopes will lead to a more committed, targeted and involved membership.

The first startup boot camp is scheduled for October 23 to 25, and TON hopes to attract up to 75 participants who will self-categorize themselves into the various functions a new company needs, such as development, marketing and so on. On the Friday evening, as many as a dozen of the participants will pitch their ideas for a startup and teams will be formed based on who else wants to join them to work on that pitch for the weekend. On Sunday evening, each team will make its pitch, with the winner coming away with $5,000 if it incorporates as a fresh start-up.

TON’s new programming line up is a welcome evolution for an organization that significantly revitalized itself last year after a couple of years of fairly moribund existence. We’ve been big supporters of the network almost from the beginning, and I saw several instances last year where exciting new ventures got a solid helping hand as a result of a TON initiative.

Even better, in my view, is the introduction of a membership fee. As Shopify founder Toby Lutka said at a different event a few months ago, “Twenty four dollars is a slightly more annoying version of free.” His point, which I thoroughly endorse, is that if you have created something of real value, people ought to be willing to pay you something to use it. Not incidentally, in the process of charging for something, you also find committed customers, rather than just tire kickers. Those who can’t afford the fee — TON has always been attractive to those looking for work or operating ventures on a shoestring — can still attend up to three events a year without paying anything.

I’ll be a regular at TON events both for its inherent value to my own business and so that I can continue to bring its news to readers of this blog.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • >