Alberta Business Marketing

Ahhh – the beauty of procrastination. We all do it. Things get busy, and what was once important to us gets pushed to the bottom of the list. Particularly things that don’t bring immediate impact… It’s not that it doesn’t matter anymore, it just gets easier every day to push it into the background and focus on what matters most on that particular day.

For many (if not most) organizations – social media engagement tends to land in that procrastination bucket more often than not. We all know it is important. We all know the long term gains that ongoing engagement can provide. But if we just skip today – will it really matter? And then, just one more day? And then eventually, we realize 2 months have gone by and it has become too easy to keep it on the bottom of the list.
I am a huge advocate for all organizations – both for those in the non-profit and for-profit sectors – to stay actively engaged in the social media space. And I believe it’s critical for all of us in the marketing sector to do so on a personal level as well. How can we improve our business success if we don’t know what the consumer sentiment is out there, if we don’t understand where our consumers are engaging, and if we aren’t playing in the space that our customers are living every day? And how can our organizations gain consumer belief that we are engaged with them, if we take long spells off… and yet, here I am, 2 months into a new job and new routines, and realizing that the busy-ness of my life has gotten in the way of this important part of the business of my life. My active engagement first slowed, and then stopped over the past 2 months, as I justified to myself every day that I would “get to it tomorrow”. Luckily – “tomorrow” came today. And as I jump back into it, and get myself back into a routine that keeps active engagement a daily part of my life, I thought I would write a quick post to urge all of you to do the same. …. Unfortunately it’s also been a couple of months since this blog made it up to the top of my list, so figured I’d correct that at the same time.

So please, remember – no matter what industry you are in – stay active in what is happening with your company, your competitors and your customers. Know where people and businesses important to you are, and what they are saying. And structure your day in such a way that it doesn’t make it to the procrastination bucket. It doesn’t need to take too much time, but it does need to be consistently acted upon.

Now if you’ll excuse me – I’m feeling a need to tweet.

Vicki Waschkowski

Tags: Not-for-Profit, social media
Posted in Uncategorized | | Comments Off

Many critics have been raving about the rapid adoption rate of Google's new SM platform Google+ . If you're to just look at the raw data, their quickly growing user base is certainly impressive. After all, it only took 10 days for Google to amass a staggering 10 million users - a milestone that took years for Facebook and Twitter to reach.

With such a massive flood of new participants, it would seem that, surely, Google+ is the next big thing. Right? Unfortunately, I think we've neglected one key variable when making this comparison: ease of adoption. Like hundreds of millions of other people, I use Google's webmail service Gmail. That means I have a Google account that allows for customized searching, mapping, panda video watching, et. al. The list goes on and on, each hook connected to the last. Much of what I do online is connected back to them. So, when Google+ was launched, they had an easy opportunity to reach me. I signed into my email one day and Google+ was right there in front of me. The sign-up process was lightning fast and easy. Which makes sense, considering they already had a swarm of info about me in their database.

My point is this: when it came time for Google to recruit new users, they had a vast pool of extremely warm leads to draw from. Now, let's compare this experience to, say, Facebook. I had never heard of Facebook when it came out. I received emails from friends inviting me to join, but I was skeptical because these things don't always catch. Then there was the privacy issue. It was weird to give some (at the time) unknown entity a bunch of info bits about where I went to school and what personal info I wanted to share with "friends". I had to visit a new website - nay - an entirely new form of the Internet, and say "yeah, I'll give these guys a chance to impress me".. Google+ grew fast because the high-level trust with the brand was already there. Facebook and Twitter had to overcome a lot more barriers to win us over. And in my opinion, it's far more impressive - and perhaps a better indicator of future success - to win people over based on the offering itself vs. the brand behind the offer.

Perhaps Google+ is destined to become the next big thing. All the face-value indications are pointing in that direction. But I'm going to sit on it before predicting mammoth success. Because it's one thing to sign up - but it's another to keep signing in.

Brook Johnston

Tags: Customer Experience, social media, technology
Posted in Uncategorized | | Comments Off

Now I'll openly admit I've been a proponent of LinkedIn as I've previously written. I’ve often said if I was on a desert island and had to choose one social network (from a business perspective) - it would be a tough decision because other social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and others all have significant merits but my choice would be LinkedIn. Based on this quick online (unofficial) poll others think the same way.

I'd also like to make it clear I'm not an employee of the company. I don’t own any stock in the company. Nor do I do receive any financial remuneration from the company.

What's the reason for this disclosure? Well I wanted to make that clear despite being a proponent given that LinkedIn has recently been in the news about their social ads. What happened was that LinkedIn was automatically opting-in its +100 million users into a social advertising program.

The way the social advertising worked was that when a LinkedIn user viewed a third-party advertisement on the social network, they would see others in their network who followed or recommended the promoted brands. So in a way it appears to be an endorsement of sorts.

Grab the pitchforks. Queue the outrage and threats to leave Linkedin from the commentariat on websites and blogs across the digital space. Indeed many people got annoyed by the social ads as it reminded some of the controversy surrounding Facebook a few years ago. Candidly, I first found out about this when someone I followed on Twitter flagged this blog post by Steve Woodruff which provided step-by-step instructions in how to unsubscribe from LinkedIn social ads.

Since I read Seth Godin’s Permission Marketing years ago I’ve always believed that as a best practice customers or users should opt-in to your marketing – as opposed to making them opt-out. That could have been a better way for LinkedIn where they could have avoided this controversy. However in fairness I’d also like to bring up a few points that come to mind:

(1) Years ago when Google started embeding advertising overlays in their videos, I tweeted my annoyance. I mean having the audacity to subject users to advertising! I was corrected by my friend David Jones who subtly noted “What do you expect when using a service for free?” I had to admit he was right. Doesn't the same principle apply with Linkedin? Most people use the basic service on LinkedIn which is free but as any company Linkedin has various operating, marketing and technology expenses. Revenue must come from somewhere such as advertising - especially when answerable to shareholders as a publicly-traded company.

(2) Very few people read the Terms of Service (TOS) when signing up for social networks. But LinkedIn does stipulate what happens when you sign-up for using this social network. No the TOS aren't as short and as simple as a blog post but they are there for anyone to review. So it’s not like they were nefarious and snuck something about social advertising under the cover of night.

(3) Speaking of cover of night, LinkedIn did post on their blog back in early June about changes to their privacy policy and also again in late June about their new social ads. So they were telling members what they planned to do.

(4) If LinkedIn were planning on burying this issue surrounding the issue of social ads, why would they continue to leave it on the homepage of most users and feature it as a top headline in the LinkedIn Today section? (Per screenshot below.) Does this strike you as a company trying not to be transparent?

(5) Lastly, LinkedIn quickly responded to the concerns of their members and modified some of the ‘social ads’ to reinforce that member’s trust was very important. They also showed how members could unsubscribe from social ads with one click.

Could LinkedIn have communicated more appropriately with members? Yes but beyond maybe making the service opt-in to begin with or communicating in the original blog post how people could opt-out, I’m unsure of what else people expect of them. Some have suggested LinkedIn could have emailed members but I can’t help but think some people would get outraged with spam in their inboxes.

At the end of the day LinkedIn could have improved a few things but they responded to the community. I’m also sure they learned their lesson. I don't believe one should judge based on a single error but rather what is done to correct it and ensure it doesn't repeat itself. So I won't quite be deleting my account or becoming LinkedOut from LinkedIn quite just yet.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

Tags: Digital, privacy, social media, This and That
Posted in Uncategorized | | Comments Off

While companies have always needed to sustain a strong and positive reputation to succeed, today, every business leader also needs to manage their own personal brand. Given that information is so widely and quickly shared online, it's easy for even the most brand-savvy executive to find themselves being portrayed in ways that are either inaccurate, or worse, potentially damaging.

The good news is that leaders can adopt a proven strategy that builds a relevant and dynamic reputation that is right for them and their company. That strategy, which is rooted in product management, begins with the recognition that every person is more than a brand -- i.e. the way that you are thought of or spoken about by others -- they are, in fact, a product. This alters the way you should market yourself.

For example, if you were simply marketing a brand online, you would focus on shaping key messages (e.g. Steve Jobs is known as an innovator who is obsessed with perfection). You would limit yourself to being concerned with the language used to describe you, where that conversation takes place, and who you are associated with. But, marketing yourself as a product, means you address what it is you actually do -- your features and functionality -- along with how this brings value to your clients, your colleagues, your profession or your community (e.g. Steve Jobs leads one the world's most inventive companies which consistently yields better-than-expected dividends).

According to Simon Brightman, a much sought-after product management expert, "Successful senior executives have embraced a product management approach because it is based on results, profitability and the ability to adapt."

To present yourself successfully as a product means following a proven five phase process:

Phase I: Idea Generation. In this phase conduct some initial research. Also, contact relevant associations and identify those people who are thought of as highly successful. With these findings in hand, identify your own strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats. Finally, develop possible visions of you as a product -- i.e. what are some of the things that you will do and how that fills a particular market's need.

Phase 2: Assessment and Prioritization. Based on the ideas that you develop in the first phase, get some feedback. Also use friends and colleagues to help you determine if what you plan to do is actually in-line with who you are. "This is one of the most critical phases when defining yourself as a product", according to Jeff Hendler of Toronto-based professionals, The Product Accelerators. He continues, "To effectively transform yourself into a successful product means knowing your true capabilities and how you approach problems."

Phase 3: Product Development. Once you know what it is you are planning to do, start pulling together the resources required to build you as a marketable product. That means adding new skills, pursuing specialized accreditations and identifying those people or organizations that will play a role in marketing you. For example, reach out to colleagues and have them write strong recommendations for you on your LinkedIn profile. It's at this stage that you should also be developing and testing the kinds of messages that you want to emphasize when promoting yourself.

Phase 4: Launch. Now that you are a well-defined and tested product, it's time for you to systematically introduce yourself to the market that will benefit most by what it is that do. Gather initial feedback to see how you are being perceived. Determine if you are being embraced by your target markets.

Phase 5: Refine. Based on the results from the launch phase, look to refine your core offering. "Refinement and adjustment are the keys to the longevity of a product. People forget that today's iPod has gone through nearly a dozen iterations. The same is true when defining yourself as a product", says Brightman. "Collecting feedback and a commitment to constantly improve has turned the iPod into a game changing product."

Going through these steps will help you to present yourself as a product, leading to even more potential to succeed.

Andrew Brown

Tags: Branding, social media, Strategy
Posted in B2B | | Comments Off

Tags: accounting, environmental audit, Gen-Y, guide, Human Resources, IT, legal, outsourcing, Professional Services, social media, translator
Posted in Uncategorized | | Comments Off