Perhaps it's because I'm writing this on a MacBook Pro. Perhaps it's because we have over a half dozen Apple devices in our home. Perhaps it's the way I see my 3 year old daughter effortlessly using an iPad and technology without a second thought. Or perhaps I still remember when I first used a computer (Apple IIE) and how it was a moment of 'child-like wonder'.

I'm sure you have heard, Steve Jobs the founder of Apple and until recently its CEO, passed away yesterday due to the scourge of cancer. He left behind a wife and young family. He also left behind a legacy as an innovator and someone who demanded excellence. Someone who never contented himself or his company with the status quo.

Indeed I had the privilege to work at Apple but I only saw him once from a distance when I travelled to headquarters in Cupertino, California. But let me tell you that you felt his presence throughout the Apple and it was firmly ingrained within the company DNA.

Words that come to mind as it relates to Steve Jobs and Apple as a former employee? Excellence. Drive. Innovation. Marketing. Simplicity. Financial Performance. Ruthlessness. Secrecy. Vision.

Now I'm not about to suggest that Steve Jobs was perfect. But really who amongst is? He was no deity but one would be naive to deny the tremendous impact Steve Jobs had on marketing, technology and perhaps our society at large especially in the past decade.

Whether it was the founding of Apple. Being later unceremoniously removed from the very company he founded. Returning back to Apple to help it rise like a phoenix from the ashes and the precipice of bankruptcy. Taking Pixar Studios to the next level and making it a blockbuster company in terms of computer animation. Steve Jobs consistently made his mark.

Steve Jobs took an almost bankrupt company (with financial help from Microsoft) and made it one of the largest companies in terms of market capitalization on the planet. He did so by launching innovative and revolutionary products such as the MacBook, iPod, iPhone and iPad. Each of which significantly raised the bar in terms of the quality of products that companies in the consumer electronics industry produced. Each also severely disrupting other established industries such as music and entertainment.

So here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The trouble-makers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. Like Steve.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

I recall when the economy was 'good' and I'd receive dozens upon dozens of qualified resumes. Ones that actually met the hiring criteria and didn't have any grammatical errors, typos or inappropriate profiles on social networks. (Yes, any employer worth their salt is going to Google candidates, check them out on LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook.)

But even with sufficient filtering a hiring manager will still be overwhelmed in a tsunami of resumes. So what do job seekers do? How does one differentiate themselves? How does one stand out from the crowd? What can they do that is innovative?

A friend of mine, Heidi Jackman, is the CMO at Sliderocket. The company was founded in 2007 with the simple goal of building better presentations because we all know how painful some visual presentations can be.

Heidi recently forwarded me an terrific story. Where an aspiring job seeker by the name of Hanna Phan put forward her intent of looking for position at SlideRocket. But she didn't do via resume. Take a look here or below.

Pretty impressive. As Heidi aptly commented "This is both such a great story, an amazing show of creativity and a bright spot in our tough job economy."

So I'm sure it's no surprise to you that Heidi hired Hanna. Here is an explanation in Hanna's own words of why she did something different.

My point is not that everyone should use SlideRocket although I'm sure Heidi and Hanna would love it if you did.

Figure out as a leader, marketer or job seeker (agency side or client side) what you can do in a genuine and innovative way to stand out from the crowd. Odds are you can. And odds are it's not just another campaign or resume.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

Well I’m glad you asked - according to Webster’s, it’s the period between early July and early September when the hot sultry weather of summer usually occurs in the northern hemisphere; a period of stagnation or inactivity.

It won’t be long before the kids are back in school, vacations are a distant memory, and you are back in the groove.

Which begs the question, how well is your groove working for you?

I often hear people lament – specifically on the work front – that there simply aren’t enough hours in the day. Well the hours in a day are finite, how we use those hours is a choice.
How does one in essence create more time?

Rule # 1 – Multi-tasking is a myth. While we may be able to do a couple of rote tasks at the same time doing two or more things at once and/or switching tasks consistently – reading the report, checking e-mail, talking on the phone, back to the report – means our brain literally has to shift gears as different tasks use different parts of the brain. This mental gymnastics takes time – both the switching and the refocusing. Commit to a task and stick with it to get more done in less time.

Rule # 2 – Energy = Productivity. You can have the best of intentions; be sitting in front of your computer, and even typing words however, if you are not in a peak state (i.e. high energy) you are accomplishing less. When we are in “flow”; that state where time flies by and what we are doing feels effortless, we achieve our personal best. We need to be accessing all of our brain to be in flow. Physical activity helps, drinking lots of water, and getting plenty of rest to name a few.

Rule # 3 – Prioritize. Business guru Peter Drucker said it best “Do first things first and second things not at all”. As human beings we are social creatures and research has shown “feeling in on things” is a prime motivator for employees. So much so that I believe people attend meetings they don’t have to, throw their hat in the ring to be part of a project when their expertise could be better utilized elsewhere. Make a list of everything you are currently working on. Prioritize what you feel will yield the highest return based on your organization’s goals. Do you have the time you need to work on this? If not, what could you drop to free up time? If you lack objectivity bring a trusted colleague into the scenario to help and offer to do the same for them.

Time really is on your side, it’s up to you to make sure it stays that way.

Shelley McQuade

You read correctly. A&F offered to pay Mr. Sorrentino to not wear their product. It was their view that he portrayed a negative impact on their brand based on his demeanour and behaviour on the show. A spokesperson for A&F said "Mr. Sorrentino's association with our brand could cause significant damage to our image."

It's interesting to see how A&F doesn't want a reality-television celebrity to wear their clothes or promote their brand. There is no doubt this was a deliberate marketing publicity stunt by A&F and I'm obviously not the only one to make this observation as one friend aptly noted. Needless to say many people have been discussing this news be it via own social networks and in the news.

The last time that A&F got this kind of publicity it was for another reason. And not a good one.

A&F is definitely going against the norm by asking a celebrity not to use their products. In most cases, companies would be desperate to get that kind of free publicity. It's no secret many companies pay millions of dollars for product placement in television shows and movies. Regardless of your opinion of "The Situation", there is no denying that A&F gets an incredible amount of free exposure from him that would otherwise cost a ton of ad dollars if A&F tried to run an equivalent ad campaign.

All of this is tongue in cheek of course because if A&F's request was serious about protecting their brand, their legal department would simply have to contact MTV (the producer of Jersey Shore) and told them to cease and desist. Subsequently their logos and brand would then have to be 'blurred' out in future episodes.

MTV of course wisely played along with the whole thing and didn't get their nose out of joint. So both A&F and Jersey Shore got a lot of free publicity from this move especially during the critical 'Back-to-School' phase of the calendar. Although it must be said the financial markets didn't quite respond positively to the recent fiscal results of A&F.

So perhaps we shouldn't quite yet conclude that paying celebrities to not promote a product is the new black.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

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

A couple weeks ago I was at an alumni event for my alma mater and it brought back memories of being in the library until the wee hours and writing my Master's thesis on email. (Yes I've been an email fanboy for a while. Stop snickering.) Years later I was part of a group of CMA members that created a Guide to Email Marketing. Download a free copy of it here.

I'll admit I've always been a proponent of email and how it can do wonders for us. Would anyone disagree with the notion that email is an integral part of our daily lives both personally and professionally?

Having said that I’ve been thinking about innovation as it applies to business, technology and marketing. And although email was a very innovative creation it can be argued it now stifles innovation. Our inboxes are filling up more and more and we’re struggling to keep pace. We don't have time to do 'work' because we are incessantly checking our inboxes. Inbox owners are losing the war. Some people have resorted to declaring email bankruptcy.

Chris Anderson of Wired and TED fame is of the view that the very purpose of email to improve our time, energy and sanity at work is now actually having the opposite effect. The reason according to Mr. Anderson isn't email itself but that most people are extremely bad at using this tool. His position is that "The total time taken to respond to an email is often MORE than the time it took to create it." I never thought about it that way before.

So Mr. Anderson created an Email Charter with input from the online community. The 10 rules in the charter are simple but could make a universal impact if widely adopted by more users out there - including myself.

Candidly, I'm guilty of some of the transgressions outlined in the Email Charter so I'm now trying to abide by it. In addition to the 10 Rules to Reverse the Email Spiral, I'm remembering two other small tips I’ve recently come across by people I respect.

1. Guy Kawasaki - Keeping emails to 6 sentences or less.
2. Seth Godin – Ask "If I had to pay $0.42 to send this email, would I?"

[If you have any thoughts, opinions or tips regarding email please add them to the discussion in the comments section below.]

The creation of email is a major technological and communication innovation but if used improperly it can be an impediment to future innovation. It can stifle productivity and waste the valuable time and resources of others. Not to mention how email can be lousy in expressing sentiment and emotion that could be better addressed in a conversation.

The last thing I want to do is contribute to the problem. So it's time to start contributing to the solution. If that means by trying to respect an Email Charter then so be it.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

I was recently reading (I always get more reading done in the summer) a report from McKinsey (April 2011) entitled: Sparking creativity in teams: An executive’s guide. It provides practical ideas about how to engage teams and help them to be more creative to stimulate growth and performance.

How many of us have actually gone through the purchase cycle of our own products – online and in-store? This would include conducting research online as any consumer might, calling in to your company and asking a question about a product or service and completing a sale (hopefully you can get a refund if not really required). McKinsey suggests doing this as well as going through the same exercise with a competitor. Record the experiences step by step and then dissect and discuss with your team.

Another suggested technique is to use analogies – forcing comparisons between companies that are nothing alike. Let’s consider we are a bank trying to take our credit card program to the next level. Draft some questions such as those noted below and use them as a starting point for discussion.
• How would Google manage our data?
• How would Apple design our customer experience?
• How would Shoppers design our loyalty program?

The final technique I will discuss is called “creating constraints”. While imposing constraints in a creative exercise might seem backward, what it does is force people to leave their comfort zones and perhaps be even more creative. McKinsey suggests asking participants to imagine a world where they must function within severe limits – here are a few idea starters:
• You can only interact with your customers online.
• You can only serve one customer segment.
• The price of your product is cut in half.
• You must charge a five-fold price premium for your product.
• Your largest channel disappears overnight.

Essentially what these exercises are trying to do is to put people in unexpected environments to generate creative output. Hopefully you will find one or two ideas to make your “back to school” team meeting more creative.

Dawn Marchand

Moving beyond standard demographics, this research provides an opportunity for marketers to target based on interests or “passion” instead of standard demographics like age and household income. Consider hockey as an example. A marketer could present the same offer to a 30 year-old female teacher and a 50 year-old male truck driver because they both have a strong affinity for teams, even though they have very different backgrounds. This tool sounds most appealing for companies looking to better leverage sponsorship investments – connecting their brand to target consumers. And, who isn’t concerned about achieving better brand leverage from sponsorships?

Passion drivers appears to be one option for sports marketing … I wonder if there are similar tools for electronics, financial services or other consumer segments.

Dawn Marchand

Naturally a lot of advice regarding interviews is common sense. For example, it amazes me how many people in actual interview scenarios are asked if they checked out a company website and the answer is often 'no'. It totally blows my mind in an era of Google, Facebook, LinkedIn and other social networks but I digress.

There are many others things one can do to be prepared for an interview besides doing your homework beforehand. Be on time. Be well dressed. Be honest about your credentials and experience. Be confident. Most importantly - be yourself.

The last point is the one that I feel is really important based on my experience. In today's business world there is indeed a lot of pressure to land that coveted role. However, it is critical you be yourself during the interview process. If you present yourself as anything different you will be miserable if you land the job under false pretences. A prospective employer should hire you because they are thrilled about you. Not some contrived persona.

I'd also take it a step further - within reason - to let your personality shine through in the interview if circumstances allow it. Let me give you a personal example.

Through the gracious introduction of a friend, I interviewed for a marketing position with a company I respected. They weren't quite a start-up but more of an 'up-start'. The company has a unique interview process where multiple employees at different levels of the organization interview prospective candidates and not just the senior leadership team.

I think it's brilliant as it allows them to get a real feel for potential candidates and the candidate to meet different employees. The employees would also have to feel empowered that they are part of the selection process and have a say if a candidate is the right fit for the company. This is critical when a company's culture has been carefully fostered and cultivated over many years.

During my 3rd interview, one of the interviewers said that he was asked before the interview if he had heard of me. He said the only "Sulemaan" he had heard of was this:

Now clearly I'm not the individual in this video. My moves on the dance floor vary from gusts of awful to winds of terrible. You will never see me on a dance floor. I smiled and told the interviewer the dancer definitely wasn't me.

A few days later I had a follow-up interview with the same gentleman and his team to tie-up loose ends and outstanding questions. This time I decided to add a little spice to things. I went to a local costume store and bought a replica Michael Jackson glove.

The next interview, I waited for the right moment. I said I needed to get a pen from my bag, reached down and put on the glove on and continued to take notes like nothing unusual had happened. The interviewers were surprised and chuckled.

I smiled and said something along the lines of "I can't dance like Michael Jackson but I can wear a glove like him." The interviewers got a real kick out of that. One of them actually put the glove on himself after I took it off and started doing Michael Jackson dance move hand gestures. But let me tell you they were still very serious and asked some tough questions.

Was wearing the glove a risky move? Perhaps but after the first couple of interviews I had a pretty good idea of the culture and people at that organization. I also figured it was a good litmus test to see how people reacted to different ideas, even ones appearing way out of the box.

Now I'm not suggesting you come to an interview in a clown suit. Nor be armed with resumes printed on pink paper doused in perfume. What I am suggesting is that you use the interview process as an opportunity to interview the company as well. Ask them tough questions (in a polite and respectful manner).

What I am also suggesting is you should infuse your own personality into the interview process if you have a sense the culture and environment allows that. Better to know how people respond to it during the interview process than after signing on the dotted line.

And how did those interviews go for me? Security promptly escorted me out of the building. Kidding. I was fortunate enough to receive a generous offer. So maybe the Michael Jackson glove really did make a difference. Because it sure wasn't due to my dancing skills.

Sulemaan Ahmed
Twitter @sulemaan

Ahh back to reality... (and now that summer is here not too harsh of a reality). Yesterday I was at the Royal Botanical Garden -a beautiful venue - where I was practising what I preach; networking after a networking workshop I did for the Burlington Chamber. While sipping on wine we got to talking about wineries. Living a half hour drive from Niagara wine country we lamented how good the wine tastes when you are at a winery and the winemaker is passionately telling you about the grapes he selected, why he selected them and his entire process from vine to bottle. Top that off with tasting tips on how to best enjoy it in the glass (letting it breath, swirling before smelling and tasting – you get the idea). One of my fellow networkers Rick lamented “and then you buy three cases but it just doesn’t taste the same at home”.

We are sensory beings ruled by emotion vs. logic (although we like to think the contrary). We respond to stories, are stimulated by sight and sound. It’s how we’re wired or hard wired according to Evolutionary Psychology which tells us our brains haven’t changed all that much since we roamed the Savannah. It is indeed the emotion we feel from experiences that shape our lives.

As a business we have an opportunity to create a mediocre or spectacular experience. So what kind of an experience are you giving your customers? Is it happen-stance or have you carefully crafted it to meet their needs. Is it consistent and memorable or easily forgettable? Back in my advertising days, one of my key messages to clients was “I can get them in the door, what are you going to do keep them”. Before you discard the concept, thinking your business is different, you don’t sell wine or food, think again – a transformational experience is possible in any business, it simply needs to be gift wrapped uniquely for your customer. And the bonus – companies that provide exceptional experiences are rewarded with loyal customers that happily pay a premium. Perhaps it’s time for your company to move into brand prominence.

Shelley McQuade