Monday, October 06, 2008

The Hobson & Holtz Report - Podcast #386: October 6, 2008

Share This!

Content summary: FIR Listener Contest closes for entries, review begins; Michael Netzley reports from Singapore on the melamine food contamination case and also PodCamp Singapore; the Media Monitoring Minute with CustomScoop; News That Fits - brands enter the blogosphere, CIPR seeks views on social media guidelines, GM’s Olympic-sized PR blunder, iSense: ‘Welcome to Targeting 2.0’; listeners’ comments discussion and FIR Friendfeed Room round-up; news about the next three shows; music from The Alice Project; and more.

Listen to FIR now:

Get FIR:

• Download the MP3 file (27.9Mb, 60:51)
• Subscribe to the RSS feed
• Get the show at iTunes

Messages from our sponsors: FIR is brought to you with Lawrence Ragan Communications, serving communicators worldwide for 35 years, www.ragan.com; Save time with the CustomScoop online clipping service: sign up for your free two-week trial, at www.customscoop.com/fir.

For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report for October 6, 2008: A 61-minute podcast recorded live from Wokingham, Berkshire, England, and West Hills, California, USA.

Links for the blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show are posted to the FIR Show Links pages at The New PR Wiki. You can contribute - see the show notes home page for info.

• FIR #386 show notes at The New PR Wiki

Share your comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for future shows, in the FIR FriendFeed Room. You can also email us at ; call the Comment Line at +1 206 222 2803 (North America), +44 20 8133 9844 (Europe), or Skype: fircomments; comment at Twitter: twitter.com/FIR or at Jaiku: fir.jaiku.com. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 3 minutes / 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

Join the FIR Discussion Forum and extend your conversations with the FIR community. You can also join the FIR Facebook Community and become an FIR friend.

So, until Thursday October 9…

Thursday, October 02, 2008

The Hobson and Holtz Report - Podcast #385: October 2, 2008

Share This!

Content summary: Neville’s moving house; please vote for FIR at Podcast Alley; FIR listener contest update; Dan York reports; Media Monitoring Minute; News That Fits: Todd Defren’s tale of unethical behavior by an SEO agency, Guy Kawasaki gets immediate help after tweeting his dilemma, Jeremy Pepper blasts clueless use of Twitter, SocialText 3.0 will be released with social media features and an upcoming Twitter-like utility, use of the mobile Internet is growing dramatically, a study reveals consumers expects and wants companies to engage with them using social media channels, Best Buy gives store managers decision-making power over in-store media interviews but only for three days; David Phillips reports; listeners’ comments; music by Brad Sucks; and more.

Listen to FIR now:

Get FIR:

• Download the MP3 file (28.1Mb, 61:19)
• Subscribe to the RSS feed
• Get the show at iTunes

Messages from our sponsors: FIR is brought to you with Lawrence Ragan Communications, serving communicators worldwide for 35 years, www.ragan.com; Save time with the CustomScoop online clipping service: sign up for your free two-week trial, at www.customscoop.com/fir.

For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report for October 2, 2008: A 61-minute podcast recorded live from Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Links for the blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show are posted to the FIR Show Links pages at The New PR Wiki. You can contribute - see the show notes home page for info.

• FIR #385 show notes at The New PR Wiki

Share your comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for future shows, in the FIR FriendFeed Room. You can also email us at fircomments@gmail.com; call the Comment Line at +1 206 222 2803 (North America), +44 20 8133 9844 (Europe), or Skype: fircomments; comment at Twitter: twitter.com/FIR or at Jaiku: fir.jaiku.com. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 3 minutes / 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

Join the FIR Discussion Forum and extend your conversations with the FIR community. You can also join the FIR Facebook Community and become an FIR friend.

So, until Monday, October 6…

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Technology is a slave to me

Share This!

I’ve been thinking about three deals I’ve closed over the last week or so. I arranged a media interview for a client. I arranged a speaking gig. And I got a consulting assignment.

All three deals were done entirely by email, with no phone calls.

The fact that email served as the communication channel for these deals normally wouldn’t have entered my mind, but I’ve been giving a lot of thought lately to a recent post by Jeremy Pepper titled “Slave to Technology” in which he exhorted PR professionals to put down their email, IM, and other technology-based communication tools and return to the phone.

There’s no question that some people become overly-dependent on technology, a phenomenon that’s not limited to PR practitioners. I hear way too many stories about people who have been laid off by email, which provides those uncomfortable in confrontational situations with a means of doing what’s required of them without looking into the eyes of the target of their actions. People need to know when to use each tool based on what it’s good at, and the importance of face-to-face should never been underestimated.

But I just can’t agree with Jeremy when he suggests that deals get done on the phone and not by email. It’s just not true. Nor can I agree with Jeremy when he suggests that we should simply force ourselves to stop using technology altogether for some period of time (like one day a week). Sorry, but if a reporter calls to let me know he’s tied up in traffic and will be 10 minutes late to lunch, I’m not going to resist checking email just because I’ve bought into some insipid “no email day” concept.

Besides, we easily forget that the phone is technology, too.

Several years ago, a colleague who worked for Exxon (now retired) sent me a PDF of a page from a 1930s edition of Humble Oil’s salesforce publication, “The Lubricator.” (No jokes, please, this is serious.) The article addressed the introduction of telephones to Humble’s workplace. It offered tips on how far from the mouth to hold the mouthpiece and what to say when answering the phone. It explained why the company was placing only one phone in each department rather than providing one to every employee (people will talk on the phone instead of getting their work done). But the bit that jumped out at me instructed employees that the telephone was not a replacement for the accepted tool for communication: the letter.

The article conveyed management’s fear that the phone would encourage employees to procrastinate until the last minute, not write the business letter, then just pick up the phone instead, a practice the company found unacceptable. Writing the letter was the way things got done and the phone was, well, technology.

So, Jeremy. If you’d been blogging in 1932, would you have told people to put down the phone and pointed them to that typewriter thingy on their desks?

The letter has gone the way of the dinosaur; the U.S. mail is now made up almost entirely of bills, packages, and direct mail marketing pieces. Letter-writing—once the primary means of conducting business—has given way to the email. Not the phone, mind you—plenty of letters were being delivered by mail over the decades during which the phone has been a standard tool. But the phone is a real-time tool (annoying political recordings left as voice mail notwithstanding). Email is asynchronous, one of its greatest strengths.

Is it, then, a stretch to suggest that newer technologies have superceded the use of an older technology, that phone thingy on your desk (as Jeremy put it)?

(Note: This isn’t an attack on Jeremy, whom I like, respect, and admire and almost always agree with. If you’re not reading his blog, you should. I was motivated to write this counterpoint only because so many people commented, “Right on, Jeremy” that I wanted to offer the flip side of the argument.)

To be sure, there is value in a phone call. Your voice conveys sincerity and warmth that is far more difficult to communicate with text. (How many times has an innocent joke in an email been misinterpreted, causing grief for both sender and recipient?) It’s easy to digress into off-topic conversation that can build closer bonds.

But if each tool is used based on its strengths, then it becomes a matter of thoughtful integration of all the tools, not an artificial abandonment of a tool that has become a vital part of a PR practitioner’s communication mix.

I also wondered if, as Jeremy also asserts, PR people have, in fact, abandoned the phone. Jeremy wrote in response to my query that a stroll into just about any agency is greeted by silence instead of the chatter of practitioners on the phone with journalists. That’s not my experience in several agencies I visit when I visit agencies, and I get calls from agency reps almost daily, pitching me on one story or another. But I decided to ask PR people, via Twitter, how much they rely on the phone. It’s certainly not scientific, but out of 23 replies I received, only a few dismissed the phone as a critical tool:

• the phone is my worst enemy...I <3 email and texts...fast and I can respond when I have the time; phone is too intrusive
• I rarely use others in favor of in-person mtgs, IM. IM’s the channel of choice - we’re always connected. e-Mail is a relic.
• mostly EM, IM, Twitter, FB—even email is dying off; phone calls are mostly sales calls
• Absolutely. Hate phone calls. Love e-mail/IM. It’s quick, easy, and people actually stop to think before communicating. Win, win, win. 
• I don’t use my phone that much. Seems I can get lots done and get to the point in email conversations best.

I see two results from this quick-and-dirty poll. Most PR people are using the phone and those who aren’t seem to be achieving results anyway (that is, closing deals). You have to wonder how long they’d keep their jobs if they weren’t. Instead, I have no doubt that they are closing deals and achieving other vital goals. They’ve just found that the phone maybe isn’t always the best tool for closing those deals and achieving their goals.

One thing connected each of the three deals I closed by email: I knew the people I was dealing with. I had relationships with them. We could communicate by email easily based on that relationship, rather than play the voice-mail-phone-tag game.

It’s also important to consider how the people you’re contacting (reporters, bloggers, whatever) want to be contacted. Contrary to Jeremy’s assertion that you need to use the phone, there are a lot of reporters out there who’d rather you didn’t. Consider the following passage from ”Care and Feeding of the Press,” an online document from the Internet Press Guild:

Don’t call. Really.

You should not call us to find out if we received your press release. We realize that follow-ups are part of many PR organizations’ normal operating procedure, but in many cases it’s more likely to create resentment. It is appropriate to follow up on requested information, such as a sent press kit or product, but not on a blind mailing.

If we’re interested, you’ll hear from us. If we’ve already established an ongoing relationship because I’ve covered your products earlier, it’s okay to send a follow-up e-mail a few days later to ask if I have any questions; but that’s it.

Now, I know this next point goes against a lot of your training; but take our word for it: Nothing sets a writer or editor’s teeth on edge more than an eager young voice saying, “I’m calling to see if you got the press release we sent.” (It is, alas, common practice to have follow-up calls made by the most junior [read: clueless] members of an agency.) When we’re in the middle of a tight deadline, the last thing we want is a phone call that contains no new or useful information whatsoever. Thus, by making such calls, you’re harming both clients’ and your own reputations. If you actually have something substantive to add, such as pointing out an error in a press release, that’s another story; but you’re still better off sending us an e-mail about it than calling us.

What? How can it be that a reporter tells us, “You’re...better off sending us an email...than calling us?” if the only way to achieve results is on the phone?

Simple. The phone is not necessarily the best way to achieve results, meet a reporter’s needs, or close a deal. The best tool is, well, the best tool at the time and under the circumstances. Ultimately, most of us aren’t slaves to technology. Technology is a slave to our needs.

IBM’s Innovation Jam kicks off on Sunday

Share This!

Most of IBM’s “jams” are internal affairs, opportunities for employees to get together virtually and generate ideas to address specific aspects of business like sales and managing. There have been external jams, like one a couple years back addressing urban development.

The upcoming Innovation Jam 2008, though, is pretty ambitious. IBM has invited a number of companies to participate in the online brainstorming event that begins October 5 and runs for 72 hours. The focus is on “the enterprise of the future,” with four topic areas suggested by the results of the company’s Global CEO stud:

• Built for change
• Customers as partners
• Globally integrated
• The Planet and its People

IBM’s micosite dedicated to the jam is short on substance. There’s an overview of the jam concept—a site for each theme populated with content participants can consume to get a better handle on the issues along with channels through which they can engage in conversation designed to spark ideas. (Jams are a model for online collaboration.) In the past, these channels have been both real-time and asynchronous, with champions for each issue assigned to manage the related theme in the jam.) There’s an overview of each topic and a link to the CEO survey. And there are brief explanations of the value of participation ("Creating specific, practical ways to adapt and transform their companies into what they need to be to flourish in the years ahead") and who should participate ("individuals and organizations that believe in the wisdom of masses").

Missing is information on how your organization can apply for an invitation (or a notice that the invitation list is closed), although you can email IBM with questions. There also is no list of companies that are on tap to participate.

The site includes a video of Marketing & Communications Senior Vice President John Iwata discussing the jam. Curiously, the video is a WMV file that requires download, not a video that plays in an embedded window. That’s a minor complaint, but it seems so old-school for a site promoting an event about innovation.

Also curious is the green focus. Certainly, reducing the environmental footprint should be a priority for any business, but this one was prompted by the CEO survey results addressing corporate social responsibility. When the general public thinks about CSR, they think about how a company treats its employees, not how much it donates to philanthropic causes or how it tackles environmental issues.

But these issues aside, the results generated from jams have been consistently outstanding, and I hope IBM will share at least the best ideas generated during this jam.

Monday, September 29, 2008

The Hobson and Holtz Report - Podcast #384: September 29, 2008

Share This!

Content summary: FIR listener contest update; Podcamp Ireland; Michael Netzley in Singapore discusses transparency and trust in Asia; the Media Monitoring Minute with CustomScoop; News That Fits - which comes first: employees or customers?, mystery meetings, new books on crowd surfing and brands in networks, lessons learned when launching a venture with social media, MobaTalk evolves into Twitter Video, Oracle’s launch of Oracle Listens; listeners’ comments discussion and Friendfeed FIR Room round-up; news about Thursday’s show; music from Derek James; and more.

Listen to FIR now:

Get FIR:

• Download the MP3 file (28.9Mb, 63:14)
• Subscribe to the RSS feed
• Get the show at iTunes

Messages from our sponsors: FIR is brought to you with Lawrence Ragan Communications, serving communicators worldwide for 35 years, www.ragan.com; Save time with the CustomScoop online clipping service: sign up for your free two-week trial, at www.customscoop.com/fir.

For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report for September 29, 2008: A 63-minute podcast recorded live from Concord, California, USA, and Wokingham, Berkshire, England.

Links for the blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show are posted to the FIR Show Links pages at The New PR Wiki. You can contribute - see the show notes home page for info.

• FIR #384 show notes at The New PR Wiki

Share your comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for future shows, in the FIR FriendFeed Room. You can also email us at fircomments@gmail.com; call the Comment Line at +1 206 222 2803 (North America), +44 20 8133 9844 (Europe), or Skype: fircomments; comment at Twitter: twitter.com/FIR or at Jaiku: fir.jaiku.com. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 3 minutes / 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

Join the FIR Discussion Forum and extend your conversations with the FIR community. You can also join the FIR Facebook Community and become an FIR friend.

So, until Thursday October 2…

Lessons for non-profits from the grass roots

Share This!

These are tough times for non-profits, especially those looking for the contributions required to fulfill their missions. It’s hard enough asking for people to part with their money, but high energy costs and an uncertain economic outlook make it even tougher than usual.

Non-profits can learn a lot from some of the organic, grass-roots efforts that have received attention in the social media space over the last several months. In the case of the Frozen Pea Fund, the American Cancer Society did not launch a campaign to raise money. Instead, those who knew Susan Reynolds, who blogged that she was afflicted with breast cancer, undertook to raise money as a means of expressing their support for Susan, with the funds they collected earmarked for the American Cancer Society. The Austin blood drive tweetup produced a record number of first-time blood donors, but not based on any call to action from the blood center. Instead, it was a program launched by the Austin Social Media Club and promoted by interested individuals through tweets and blog posts.

People listen to each other thse days more than organizations. That’s precisely why a bunch of people on Twitter raised money from people who would not have otherwise donated to the American Cancer Society. It’s why people gave blood in response to an appeal from others in their network when they had never responded to a direct appeal from the Red Cross or their local blood center.

The lesson for the non-profits is to turn some of their donation efforts over to their most passionate advocates. Rather than hold out their hands and ask for money, they can make information available about the needs the donations will address. Get this information into the hands of people who will use it, from those you have already identified as your biggest supporters to those whose current social media activities indicate they’d be highly sympathetic to your cause.

Your own employees can even promote the issues, as long as they’re transparent about it and remain focus on the results the donations will produce instead of requesting money.

This notion isn’t dissimilar to something I head of Christopher S. Penn and John Wall’s “Marketing Over Coffee” podcast, the idea that if you ask a venture capitalist for money, you’ll get advice, but if you ask for advice, you’ll get advice and money. Translated to non-profit donation efforts, ask for money and you’ll get an excuse, but if you can make the need resonate with the right people, you’ll get money (or blood, if that’s the goal).

Non-profits can grease the skids by making material available for people to use in their efforts. How much easier would the Frozen Peas donations have been if the American Cancer Society had a place where the grassroots activists could have created a landing page that included a donation button and a place for the effort’s leaders to tell their story?

This is about more than just engaging in conversation. It’s about enabling people who care—people with networks—to have the converation on your behalf.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Research brief links engagement, business improvement to internal use of Web 2.0

Share This!

The value of enabling social media for employees, both inside and outside the firewall, keeps getting reinforced by study after study, yet organizations continue to block access to external sources while resisting internal implementation citing excuses ranging from bandwidth and storage limitations to fears of diminished worker productivity.

Aberdeen Group has produced another study the naysayers can ignore. Focused on talent management and employee engagement, the research brief links the use of Web 2.0 to higher levels of engagement and better company performance.

The linkage doesn’t prove that Web 2.0 was directly responsible for producing these results, however. The fact that “best-in-class” organizations are more likely to use blogs, wikis, and social networking tools than other companies could just mean that best-in-class organizations are generally more inclined to trust employees and adopt new tools they can use to collaborate and share knowledge and information.

Still, companies looking to boost engagement and improve recruiting and retention can certainly learn a lesson by studying the behaviors of those organizations that are outperforming them. According to Aberdeen’s brief, titled Web 2.0, Talent Management, and Employee Engagement (a PDF file):

• 52% of organizations that adopt blogs, wikis, and social networking tools (among others) achieved best-in-class performance levels compared to 5% for those that didn’t. (Note to Aberdeen: I would have liked a definition of “best-in-class.")
• The same tools were used within organizations that achieved an 18% year-over-year improvement in employee engagement. Companies that didn’t use these tools grew engagement by a mere 1%.

Other highlights from the report—which aggregate findings from several Aberdeen studies—focus on…

Recruiting—A 45% increase in spending on “software that links to networking site (e.g. Facebook or LinkedIn) or other communities of practice” as part of the recruiting process will increase internal recruiters’ ability to connect with potential recruits. These tools also let employees post messages to “lend a voice to the market on the work culture at a particular company.”

Onboarding—Social networking is being used to connect newly-hired employees with mentors and coaches as well as build relationships with other employees. “In addition,” the brief notes, “blogs and wikis are also used as a means for a new employee to provide content/commentary on a topic at which he/she is an expert where others within the organization are struggling.”

Learning and development—About a third of organizations surveyed for an upcoming study from Aberdeen said the biggest growth in learning and development over the next year will come from “informal learning.” The investment these companies will make in blogs, social networks, and communities will “stimulate peer-to-peer learning and ideation, as well as facilitate communities of practice in which organizatoins can leverage the collective knowledge of their employees.”

With the introduction of Yammer, Present.ly, and other internal-facing presence tools, it’s too bad the Aberdeen report was focused exclusively on the first wave of social media tools. But the mere fact that Aberdeen joins companies like McKinsey, Gartner, and Forrester in endorsing these tools as drivers of business improvement can only help those trying to make the case for internal social media with those inclined to resist it.