Tag Archives: facebook

Why CIOs Should Co-Lead Customer Experience

GUEST POST from Howard Tiersky

Forrester recently gathered top Customer Experience (CX) professionals from around the world for the Forrester CX Forum in New York. For the uninitiated, CX is the discipline of defining the step-by-step customer journey from marketing through sales and service. It defines the key capabilities, content, and interfaces that need to be present at each customer touchpoint and how those touchpoints work together to form a cohesive experience.

At the conference, extensive data was presented to support the argument that delivering a seamless customer experience is more important than ever. In fact, it’s the primary way digital disruptors, like Uber and Amazon, are taking share from more traditional brands.

Forrester found that from 2011 to 2015, revenues for companies that scored near the top of the Forrester CX Index™ outgrew that from a group of companies who scored poorly (CX laggards in Forrester’s terminology) by more than five to one.

But who is actually in charge of CX, and who should be? Many CIOs classically would respond that these types of matters―the design of the website, its features, and generally how we interact with the customer―is the responsibility of marketing or other areas of “the business.” Once “business” decides what they want, IT will build and support it – that’s the breakdown of responsibilities. For the CIO, this may seem to be the most efficient arrangement, as they have plenty to worry about and sometimes it’s nice to be able to identify something they don’t have to focus on.

But in testing this classic mindset through conversations with many of the CX experts at the Forrester Summit, I heard a strong, unanimous dissent with this traditional view. The view of the CX community is that to deliver great results in customer experience, senior IT leadership must be intensively involved in the full CX lifecycle, not merely a recipient of requirements when it’s time to write some code, and not merely kept apprised in an “FYI” type fashion. For example, Ori Soen, General Manager of Medallia Digital, a leading provider of CX software, offered, “We clearly see that when CIOs and their IT teams are customer-centric and focused on CX, the organization is able to generate much better business outcomes from its CX investment.”

These experts point to successful CX companies, such as Google, Facebook, and Airbnb, where the development teams and business teams are working as one unit, making decisions about the experience, and implementing it together.

As Daniel Davenport, Managing Director of Liquid Hub, an agency that focuses on customer engagement, articulated, “I think it is important for the CIO to have a voice at the table and co-create the ultimate solution.”

But as busy as enterprise CIOs and their key lieutenants are, I pressed the CX experts at the Forrester Forum as to exactly why it’s truly essential that the CIO be so aggressively involved in CX and what the specific areas of value are. After speaking with some CX professionals, I derived five key areas of significant value that are derived from CIO involvement in the CX process.

1. Art of the Possible

CX innovation sits at the intersection of customer need and the ever-changing landscape of what is technically possible. It’s too abstract for CX professionals to define requirements and ask IT to figure out how to make them work if the CX teams don’t have a good sense of what they have to work with. New technologies from Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Virtual Reality to In-memory computing make it possible to do things today that were impractical just a year or two ago. But IT can’t be expected to “brief” CX professionals on every technology in the world. Instead, the process needs to be a collaboration of those studying what customers need and those studying what technology is newly enabling so that they can pool their knowledge and find new intersections where value can be created for the customer and the company. That only happens when IT is intimately involved in the ongoing process of considering the next generation CX.

2. Understanding Level of Effort and Dependencies for Prioritization and Planning

In an enterprise, there are typically many systems and many simultaneous programs going on that impact what can be implemented, when it can be implemented and with what level of effort. CX teams need to be constantly considering how their visions intersect with the technical reality of enterprise IT to develop CX roadmaps that aggressively bring new capabilities to market, but don’t crash headlong into other initiatives, system upgrades, or compliance issues.

Furthermore, CX design requires the continuous balancing of the customer’s optimal experience and various business considerations, including the cost of implementing new capabilities and the cost of supporting them. A significant component of these cost factors is IT. Therefore, there is a constant and ongoing need to both understand from IT what the level of effort might be for any given enhancement, and perhaps even more importantly, IT should be a creative collaborator in thinking about how to optimize technical approaches so that great CX ideas can be implemented with a sensible value equation. To do this effectively, IT can’t just “cost out” requirements provided by the business, but needs to be “on the inside” to understand what is really trying to be accomplished. Sometimes the answer that works economically relies on a different set of requirements than that which was initially envisioned, and an engaged senior IT partner can get creative with their colleagues to search for the best value equation.

3. Measuring CX

Measurement is a huge component of CX. The goal of CX is to move the customer through a journey from awareness to consideration to purchase to advocacy and loyalty. Many discreet components make up this journey across various touchpoints: the emails sent to customers, individual features of an app, the information available to call center representatives, and the way returns are handled. The constant obsession of CX professionals is, “How do we make this process better so the customer is more delighted and the business outcome is even more robust?” But to do so, it is essential to constantly measure the impact of each individual component of the customer’s mindset and behavior. Measuring these many interactions is often complex because it requires collecting data across many different touchpoints and then being able to correlate it so as to figure out the puzzle of causality. That requires understanding enterprise data and how to connect it across very diverse systems ― an expertise that IT needs to bring to the table.

In addition to the enterprise systems themselves, there are many excellent and deeply technical tools that support the CX measurement process. CIOs need to be deeply involved in these systems just as they would in finance or HR systems. I spoke with David McBride, a CX expert and Director of Product Management at IBM who argued, “CIOs have long been focused on creating technology to help businesses operate; when they participate in the CX process, they get to see data or even videos of customers and how they may be struggling to move through the current customer journey.” IBM’s Behavioral Analytics tool (formerly known as Tealeaf), for example, offers tools that record user sessions for analytical purposes. McBride notes, “There is nothing like seeing a session replayed to illustrate the extent of a particular struggle.”

4. True End-to-End Perspective

Lastly, in enterprises very often there isn’t just one CX initiative, but many, focused on different products, channels, touchpoints, or customer segments. The office of the CIO can often make sure that the ultimate customer experience is achieved by making sure that there is cohesion to both the technology and also the management of data across these different initiatives.

I spoke with Angela Wells, Senior Director, CX at Oracle about this, “At Oracle, what we have seen is that the CIO can and should be essential to CX decisions. What has happened at a lot of bigger companies is that they have made many ‘one-off’ decisions about what they thought were best-in-breed solutions in separate [areas of the business], and then the data didn’t talk to each other. It all got pretty sporadic and expensive, and it didn’t really deliver the customer experience [desired]. So, what we have found is that CIOs have become a centralized source for thinking about what’s going to happen to that data. They are thinking more of an umbrella; what’s best for the whole company, not just what’s best for my little niche?”

As small steps in customer experience grow into a larger program, you run the risk of chaos if there isn’t someone with the broader perspective. Dimitry Grenader, VP Product Marketing at Luminoso, a leading player in the AI arena, expressed this passionately, “In this day and age, CX should not just be left to marketers. Software is eating the world, and being able to put together the right platform will ultimately determine the success or failure of the efforts. Everything in today’s world starts as a feature, then becomes a product, which in turn becomes a platform, and finally becomes the operating system. If you don’t have the right operating system, you are building a castle on the sand.”

“I believe that a CIO must at the very least be a strong stakeholder, if not the driver of the CX process.”

Oracle’s Wells summed up this shift in terms of the evolving role of the CIO in our new digitally transformed world, “If you are thinking of the CIO as that straight tech-minded person, you are going to miss out on that more modern CIO that is a Chief Innovation Officer who takes responsibility to figure out how we make the most of what we are spending on technology to deliver the best customer experience.”

5. Changing the Way IT Operates

Finally, the level of transformation required to enable enterprises to deliver on their customer’s digital expectations may require a significant transformation in many facets of how IT operates, so it’s important for the CIO to deeply understand this difference.

As Forrester Vice President and Research Group Director Sharyn Leaver summed it up, “Compelling experiences, delivered digitally, separate CX winners from laggards. Firms that lead their industries to customer experience aggressively embrace business technologies to help win, serve, and retain customers — and they do so at rapid pace. This requires intense involvement from CIOs and their teams. Not at an arm’s length. But through ongoing collaboration and innovation.

“CX brings new prominence to technology’s role, but also new pressures on CIOs. The pervasive need for digital experiences exposes old systems, static organizations, and especially outmoded cultures that cannot deliver at the speed of the customer. For the CIO, this is much more daunting than merely spinning up a digital or mobile team. For many, success will require an overhaul of their organization – the people, processes, governance, and technology itself.”

This article originally appeared on the Howard Tiersky blog

Image Credits: Unsplash

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Growing Your Conversational Commerce Capability

Leave a reply

How to Optimize the Latest Major Digital Touchpoint

GUEST POST from Howard Tiersky

Conversational commerce means interacting with your customer in an automated dialog via voice or text.

Usage of voice-based conversational interfaces such as Alexa and Siri have been exploding for years. Meanwhile, over 100,000 active bots were created on FaceBook’s messenger platform during its first year several years ago.

“Digital” began to truly scale with the web, then expanded even further via apps and social. Is conversational commerce (CC) the next major touchpoint? Conversational commerce is defined as interacting with your customer in an automated dialog via voice or text. Based on our experience consulting large brands on the implementation of their digital innovations, and given trends on consumer adoption and technology-readiness, it is fair to say that we are at the dawn of the first wave of the broad implementation of conversational commerce.

For several years, IBM has been painting a fanciful picture of its Watson technology’s ability to digest volumes of information, understand questions, and provide truly insightful answers. Meanwhile, consumers are becoming more and more comfortable with dialog-style interactions via Siri, Google voice search, and Alexa.

In fact:

The number of commands (“skills”) that Alexa can respond has increased past 100,000
34 percent of all smartphone users say they turn to Siri and Google voice search at least weekly.

But conversational commerce does not necessarily have to involve voice recognition.

2017 represented the one-year anniversary of the launch of Facebook’s chatbots, which enable brands to engage in text-based automated interactions with their customers and audience. In 2017 its Messenger platform alone had already reached about 100,000 active bots, and a survey then found that nearly 80 percent of companies use or plan to use chatbots by 2020.

At the Shoptalk conference a few years ago, eBay President and CEO Devin Wenig announced the launch of eBay’s new chatbot called ShopBot, which advises customers on items they might like to buy via automated chat dialog.

This pattern makes sense, as we see that millennials — 38 percent of whom prefer texting as their number one form of interaction, according to a study from Think with Google — have elevated this type of communication to an art form.

Will Siri or SMS-like automated dialog with your brand become the next big consumer touchpoint? If so, what do you need to do to prepare?

The answer, as some of the stats above suggest, is that conversational commerce is poised to be a major and preferred interaction model for many future brand interactions.

The good news is that if your brand has built a reasonably flexible and integrated digital stack, it can often be quickly leveraged to enable high-value CC capabilities without requiring that you install “Deep Blue” in your data center.

Here are five key things to know about getting started with conversational commerce:

1. The Core of Conversational Commerce is Very Similar to Search.

If you already have a strong search platform that permits parametrization, you can use it to drive a key portion of your chat experience. When you tell eBay’s chatbot you are looking to buy a voice recorder; it asks you questions such as the size and memory capacity you need. These questions are simply the metadata parameters eBay has available for voice recorders. You can utilize the product metadata in your existing catalog to make your chatbot appear to ask smart questions, and even more importantly help the customer find what they need, but in reality, the results are very similar to what they would experience if they simply entered structured search queries.

Of course, not all queries involve the quest for a product. Some may be asking a question, such as about your return or cancellation policies, but this too is very similar to search. You can parse chat questions against your full-text index and return intelligent answers by, again, leveraging your search engine.

2. The Next Step of Conversational Commerce is About Enabling Transactions.

Once a customer has found what they are looking for, they may wish to buy, reserve, add to a wish list, or take some other action. Your chat flow needs to know when to pivot from searching to asking the customer to take action. In many cases, or in your initial releases, you may simply choose to branch to existing web screens to complete transactions, as eBay is doing with ShopBot. More sophisticated conversational commerce implementations allow the customer to take action via voice or text, such as Domino’s, which allows the customer to order a pizza by text.

3. In Text Conversations, You Generally Know Your Customer.

One of the advantages of most forms of conversational commerce, such as SMS or Facebook Messenger, is that your customer is identifiable. If the customer has a profile in your system, you can use this knowledge to make the conversational interaction simpler — and also smarter. Picking up again on our Domino’s example, when the customer texts them a pizza emoji, the bot matches their telephone number to its database and confirms that it will be placing the order with toppings based on their past preferences, and will deliver it to their home address on file. The customer will then have the opportunity to override any of these defaults if they are in the mood for Hawaiian pizza that day.

4. You Can Make the Language Parsing Easier by Giving Multiple-choice Options.

Many successful chatbots are more of a string of multiple-choice questions than a free-form dialog. This substantially reduces the challenge of “comprehending” the customer and furthermore reduces typing for users on mobile devices. Naturally, you will want to support customer-entered text strings, but a considerable number of interactions can be handled via a series of multiple-choice questions. In some ways, chat is similar to IVR systems at call centers, and can often use similar types of decision trees.

5. It Doesn’t Have to be Perfect.

There is still some novelty to automated interactions, so customers don’t expect them to be perfect. Furthermore, as with any digital platform, you have the opportunity to improve it over time iteratively. Siri has grown tremendously over the last few years in the range of queries it can handle.

A fantastic resource to help guide your prioritization of new capabilities are the chat logs themselves, which will give you a sense of the types of interactions that your customers are attempting that may not yet be supported by your platform. And in the meantime, as you become aware of such chat or voice requests, you can create short text responses to those categories of inquiries, letting the customer know what other touchpoints currently support that action. So if a customer, for example, uses a chatbot to check their account balance but then wants to transfer funds, and that is not yet supported via conversational commerce, you can supply the URL for the website or app and the toll-free number to call, so they know where to go next.

6. Develop a Core Conversational Engine, and Leverage it Across Many Different Touchpoints

It makes sense to invest in conversational commerce platforms and tie them to your existing catalog, customer data, business logic and transaction capabilities. In doing so, think of creating one central CC “engine” that will connect to a variety of conversational endpoints. To begin with, you may want to focus on enabling a chatbot on your website(s) and in your apps, and integrating with the Facebook chatbot API to allow customers to chat with your automated system via Messenger the same way they would chat with their friends. But in future iterations, it makes sense to support SMS, Skype, WeChat (if you do business in Asia), and possibly other similar platforms. Longer term, as Apple’s Siri, Google Voice, Microsoft’s Cortana, and Amazon’s Alexa continue to open up their APIs, the same conversational engine you created for text can be leveraged with relatively small modifications to support voice interactions.

Conversational commerce is already here, and most major brands have either implemented or are in some stage of planning around an implementation. You can probably leverage existing systems and data sets to create a reasonable starting point for conversational interaction without requiring sophisticated AI or language parsing. Over time, you can learn from your customers’ queries how they want to interact with you and evolve your conversational capabilities accordingly.

This article originally appeared on the Howard Tiersky blog

Image Credits: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Ideas Have Limited Value

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

There is a line of thinking that says that the world is built on ideas. It was an idea that launched the American Revolution and created a nation. It was an idea that led Albert Einstein to pursue relativity, Linus Pauling to invent a vaccine and for Steve Jobs to create the iPhone and build the most valuable company in the world.

It is because of the power of ideas that we hold them so dear. We want to protect those we believe are valuable and sometimes become jealous when others think them up first. There’s nothing so rapturous as the moment of epiphany in which an idea forms in our mind and begins to take shape.

Clearly, ideas are important, but not as many believe. America is what it is today, for better or worse, not just because of the principles of its founding, but because of the actions that came after it. We revere people like Einstein, Pauling and Jobs not because of their ideas, but what they did with them. The truth is that although possibilities are infinite, ideas are limited.

The Winklevoss Affair

The muddled story of Facebook’s origin is now well known. Mark Zuckerberg met with the Winklevoss twins and another Harvard classmate to discuss building a social network together. Zuckerberg agreed, but then sandbagged his partners while he built and launched a competing site. He would later pay out a multimillion dollar settlement for his misdeeds.

Zuckerberg and the Winklevoss twins were paired in the news together again recently when Facebook announced that it’s developing a new cryptocurrency called Libra. As it happens, the Winklevoss twins have been high profile investors in Bitcoin for a while now. The irony was too delicious for many in the media to ignore. First he stole their idea for Facebook and now he’s doing the same with cryptocurrencies!

Of course this is ridiculous. Social networks like Friendster and Myspace existed before Facebook and many others came after. Most failed. In much the same way, many people today have ideas about starting cryptocurrency businesses. Most of them will fail too. The value of an initial idea is highly questionable.

Different people have similar ideas all the time. In fact, in a landmark study published in 1922 identified 148 major inventions or discoveries that at least two different people, working independently, arrived at the same time. So the fact that both the Winklevoss twins and Zuckerberg wanted to launch a social network was meaningless.

The truth is that Zuckerberg didn’t have to pay the Winklevoss twins because he stole their idea, but because he used their trust to actively undermine their business to benefit his. His crime wasn’t creation, but destruction.

The Semmelweis Myth

In 1847, a young doctor named Ignaz Semmelweis had a major breakthrough. Working in a maternity ward, he discovered that a regime of hand washing could dramatically lower the incidence of childbed fever. Unfortunately, the medical establishment rejected his idea and the germ theory of disease didn’t take hold until decades later.

The phenomenon is now known as the Semmelweis effect, the tendency for people to reject new knowledge that contradicts established beliefs. We tend to think that a great idea will be immediately obvious to everyone, but the opposite usually happens. Ideas that have the power to change the world always arrive out of context for the simple reason that the world hasn’t changed yet.

However, the Semmelweis effect is misleading. As Sherwin Nuland explains in The Doctor’s Plague, there’s more to the story than resistance to a new idea. Semmelweis didn’t see the value in communicating his work effectively, formatting his publications clearly or even collecting data in a manner that would gain his ideas greater acceptance.

Here again, we see the limits of ideas. Like a newborn infant, they can’t survive alone. They need to be nurtured to grow. They need to make friends, interact with other ideas and mature. The tragedy of Semmelweis is not that the medical establishment did not immediately accept his idea, but that he failed to steward it in such a way that it could spread and make an impact.

Why Blockbuster Video Really Failed

One of the most popular business myths today is that of Blockbuster Video. As the story is usually told, the industry giant failed to recognize the disruptive threat that Netflix represented. The truth is that the company’s leadership not only recognized the problem, but developed a smart strategy and executed it well.

The failure, in fact, had less to do with strategy and tactics than it did with managing stakeholder networks. Blockbuster moved quickly to launch an online business, cut late fees and innovated its business model. However, resistance from franchisees, who were concerned that the changes would kill their business, and from investors and analysts, who balked at the cost of the initiatives, sent the stock price reeling.

From there things spiraled downward. The low stock price attracted the corporate raider Carl Icahn, who got control of the board. His overbearing style led to a compensation dispute with Blockbuster’s CEO, John Antioco. Frustrated, Antioco negotiated his exit and left the company in July of 2007.

His successor, Jim Keyes, was determined to reverse Antioco’s strategy, cut investment in the subscription model, reinstated late fees and shifted focus back to the retail stores in a failed attempt to “leapfrog” the online subscription model. Three years later, in 2010, Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy.

The Fundamental Fallacy Of Ideas

One of the things that amazed me while I was researching my book Cascades was how often movements behind powerful ideas failed. The ones that succeeded weren’t those with different ideas or those of higher quality, but those that were able to align small groups, loosely connected, but united by a shared purpose.

The stories of the Winklevoss twins, Ignaz Semmelweis and Blockbuster Video are all different versions of the same fundamental fallacy, that ideas, if they are powerful enough, can stand on their own. Clearly, that’s not the case. Ideas need to be adopted and then combined with other ideas to make an impact on the world.

The truth is that ideas need ecosystems to support them and that doesn’t happen overnight. To make an idea viable in the real world it needs to continually connect outward, gaining adherents and widening its original context. That takes more than an initial epiphany. It takes the will to make the idea subservient to its purpose.

What we have to learn to accept is that what makes an idea powerful is its ability to solve problems. The ideas embedded in the American Constitution were not new at the time of the country’s founding, but gained power by their application in the real world. In much the same way, we revere Einstein’s relativity, Pauling’s vaccine and Jobs iPhone because of their impact on the world.

As G.H. Hardy once put it, “For any serious purpose, intelligence is a very minor gift.” The same can be said about ideas. They do not and cannot stand alone, but need the actions of people to bring them to life.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Detecting the Seeds of Future Innovation

Leave a reply

Weak Signals, Strong Insights

GUEST POST from Chateau G Pato

In our hyper-connected world, we are inundated with information. Market data, analyst reports, and competitive intelligence systems all provide a clear picture of the present. But as a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I argue that the most transformative opportunities don’t emerge from this flood of “strong signals.” They emerge from the subtle, often contradictory, and easily dismissed weak signals on the periphery. These are the whispers of change, the fringe trends, the unarticulated customer frustrations, and the strange technological mashups that hint at a future yet to be built. The ability to detect, interpret, and act on these weak signals is the single most powerful competitive advantage an organization can cultivate. It’s the difference between reacting to disruption and proactively creating it.

Weak signals are, by definition, not obvious. They are often dismissed as anomalies, niche behaviors, or fleeting fads. They can come from anywhere: a casual comment in a user forum, a viral video that defies a category, a surprising scientific breakthrough in an unrelated field, or a quiet startup with a baffling business model. The challenge for leaders is to move beyond the comfort of big data analytics and embrace the messy, qualitative, and deeply human work of foresight. This isn’t about guesswork; it’s about building a systematic, human-centered practice for sensing the future and turning those faint whispers into a clear vision for innovation.

Why Weak Signals are Your Best Innovation GPS

Cultivating a weak-signal detection capability offers profound benefits:

Foresight, Not Just Hindsight: While strong signals confirm what has already happened, weak signals provide clues about what is *about to* happen. This gives you a critical head start in preparing for, or even driving, market shifts.
The Source of True Disruption: Most truly disruptive innovations—from personal computing to smartphones—began as weak signals on the fringe, often dismissed by established players who were focused on optimizing their core business.
Uncovering Unmet Needs: Weak signals are often an early indicator of deep, unarticulated human needs. They are the seeds of a problem that a current market solution isn’t addressing.
Building a Culture of Curiosity: Actively looking for weak signals encourages a culture of curiosity, open-mindedness, and a willingness to challenge assumptions—all essential traits for innovation.

“Strong signals confirm your past. Weak signals whisper your future. The most innovative leaders are the best listeners.”

A Human-Centered Approach to Detecting Weak Signals

Detecting weak signals is not an automated process. It is a deeply human activity that requires a specific mindset and intentional practice:

Go to the Edge: Move beyond your core market and familiar customer base. Talk to fringe users, early adopters, and even those who reject your product. Spend time in adjacent industries and with unconventional thinkers.
Embrace a Beginner’s Mindset: Temporarily suspend your expertise. Look at your industry as if you are seeing it for the first time. Why do customers do what they do? What seems strange or inefficient to an outsider?
Connect the Unconnected Dots: A single weak signal means little. The true insight comes from identifying patterns. Is a new technology in one field combining with a new consumer behavior in another? The unexpected combination of two seemingly unrelated signals is often where the magic happens.
Create “Listening Posts”: Form small, cross-functional teams whose sole purpose is to scan the periphery. Empower them to read obscure journals, follow niche social media communities, and report back on anything that feels “off” or interesting.

Case Study 1: The Rise of Social Media – A Weak Signal Ignored by the Giants

The Challenge:

In the early 2000s, the internet was dominated by large, content-heavy portals like Yahoo! and search engines like Google. Communication was primarily through email and instant messaging. The idea of people building public profiles to share personal updates and connect with friends was seen as a niche, even trivial, activity. It was a weak signal, a seemingly minor behavior on college campuses.

The Weak Signal Ignored:

For established tech giants, the signal was too faint. They were focused on the strong signals of search queries and content monetization. Facebook, MySpace, and Friendster were dismissed as “just for kids” or a “niche social trend.” The idea of a public profile as a primary mode of online identity and communication was too far outside their core business model to be taken seriously. They saw a minor curiosity, not the future of human connection.

The Result:

The companies that paid attention to this weak signal—and understood the human-centered need for connection and self-expression—went on to build a multi-trillion-dollar industry. The giants who ignored it were forced to play a decade-long game of catch-up, and many lost their dominant position. The weak signal of a simple public profile evolved into the foundational architecture of the modern internet and the economy built on it. Their failure to see this wasn’t a failure of technology; it was a failure of imagination and human-centered listening.

Case Study 2: Netflix and the Streaming Revolution – From DVDs to a Weak Signal

The Challenge:

In the early 2000s, Blockbuster was the undisputed king of home entertainment. Their business model was robust, profitable, and built on a physical presence of thousands of stores and a lucrative late-fee system. The internet was a nascent and unreliable platform for video, and streaming was a faint, almost invisible signal on the horizon.

The Weak Signal Detected:

While Blockbuster was focused on optimizing its core business (e.g., store layout, inventory management), Netflix, then a DVD-by-mail service, saw a weak signal. The signal wasn’t just about faster internet; it was about the human frustration with late fees and the inconvenience of physical stores. The company’s leaders started to talk about the concept of “on-demand” content, long before the technology was ready. They were paying attention to the unarticulated desire for convenience and unlimited choice, a desire that was a whisper to Blockbuster but a deafening call to Netflix. They began to invest in streaming technology and content licensing years before it was profitable, effectively cannibalizing their own profitable DVD business.

The Result:

Blockbuster famously dismissed Netflix’s weak signal, seeing it as a minor inconvenience to their existing business model. They believed a physical store experience would always win. Netflix, by acting on the weak signal and a deep understanding of human frustration, was able to pivot from being a DVD service to the global streaming behemoth we know today. Their foresight, driven by a human-centered approach to a technological trend, allowed them to disrupt an entire industry and become a dominant force in the future of entertainment. Blockbuster, unable to see beyond the strong signals of its profitable past, is now a cautionary tale.

Conclusion: The Foresight Imperative

The future is not a surprise that happens to you. It is a collection of weak signals that you either choose to see or ignore. In an era of constant disruption, relying on strong signals alone is a recipe for stagnation. The most resilient and innovative organizations are those that have built a human-centered practice for sensing change on the periphery. They have created a culture where curiosity is a core competency and where questioning the status quo is a daily ritual.

As leaders, our most critical role is to shift our focus from optimizing the past to sensing the future. We must empower our teams to go to the edge, listen to the whispers, and connect the dots in new and creative ways. The future of your industry is already being born, not in the center of the market, but on its fringes. The question is, are you listening?

Extra Extra: Because innovation is all about change, Braden Kelley’s human-centered change methodology and tools are the best way to plan and execute the changes necessary to support your innovation and transformation efforts — all while literally getting everyone all on the same page for change. Find out more about the methodology and tools, including the book Charting Change by following the link. Be sure and download the TEN FREE TOOLS while you’re here.

Image credit: Pexels

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Your Brand Isn’t the Problem

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Cigarette companies rebranded themselves because their products caused cancer and they wanted to separate themselves from how their customers experienced their products. Their name and logo (which stand for their brand) were mapped to bad things (cancer) so they changed their name and logo. The bad things still happened, but the company was one step removed. There was always the option to stop causing cancer and to leave the name and logo as-is, but that would have required a real change, difficult change, a fundamental change. Instead of stopping the harm, cigarette companies ran away from their heritage and rebranded.

Facebook rebranded itself because its offering caused cancer of a different sort. And they, too, wanted to separate themselves from how their customers experienced their offering. The world mapped the Facebook brand to bullying, harming children, and misinformation that destroyed institutions. Sure, Facebook had the option to keep the name and logo and stop doing harm, but they chose to keep the harm and change the name and logo. Like the cigarette companies, they chose to keep the unskillful behavior and change their brand to try to sidestep their damaging ways. Yes, they could have changed their behavior and kept their logo, but they chose to change their logo and double down on their unhealthy heritage.

The cigarette companies and Facebook didn’t rebrand themselves to move toward something better, they rebranded to run away from the very thing they created, the very experience they delivered to their customers. In that way, they tried to distance themselves from their offering because their offering was harmful. And in that way, rebranding is most often about moving away from the experience that customers experience. And in that way, rebranding is hardly ever about moving toward something better.

One exception I can think of is a special type of rebranding that is a distillation of the brand, where the brand name gets shorter. Several made-up examples: Nike Shoes to Nike; McDonald’s Hamburgers to McDonald’s; and Netflix Streaming Services to Netflix. In all three cases, the offering hasn’t changed and customers still recognize the brand. Everyone still knows it’s all about cool footwear, a repeatable fast-food experience, and top-notch entertainment content. If anything, the connection with the heritage is concentrated and strengthened and the appeal is broader. If your rebranding makes the name longer or the message more nuanced, you get some credit for confusing your customers, but you don’t qualify for this special exception.

If you want to move toward something better, it’s likely better to keep the name and logo and change the offering to something better. Your brand has history and your customers have mapped the goodness you provide to your name and logo. Why not use that to your advantage? Why not build on what you’ve built and morph it slowly into something better? Why not keep the brand and improve the offering? Why not remap your good brand to an improved offering so that your brand improves slowly over time? Isn’t it more effective to use your brand recognition as the mechanism to attract attention to your improved offering?

In almost all cases, rebranding is a sign that something’s wrong. It’s expensive, it consumes a huge amount of company resources, and there’s little to no direct benefit to customers. When you feel the urge to rebrand, I strongly urge you to keep the brand and improve your offering. That way your customers will benefit and your brand will improve.

Image credit: Pixabay

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Innovation Requires Going Fast, Slow and Meta

Leave a reply

GUEST POST from Greg Satell

In the regulatory filing for Facebook’s 2012 IPO, Mark Zuckerberg included a letter outlining his management philosophy. Entitled, The Hacker Way, it encapsulated much of the zeitgeist. “We have a saying,” he wrote. “‘Move fast and break things.’ The idea is that if you never break anything, you’re probably not moving fast enough.”

At around the same time, Katalin Karikó was quietly plodding away in her lab at the University of Pennsylvania. She had been working on an idea since the early 1990s and it hadn’t amounted to much so far, but was finally beginning to attract some interest. The next year she would join a small startup named BioNTech to commercialize her work and would continue to chip at the problem.

Things would accelerate in early 2020, when Karikó’s mRNA technology was used to design a coronavirus vaccine in a matter of mere hours. Just as Daniel Kahneman explained that there are fast and slow modes of thinking, the same can be said about innovating. The truth is that moving slowly is often underrated and that moving fast can sometimes bog you down.

The Luxury Of Stability

Mark Zuckerberg had the luxury of being disruptive because he was working in a mature, stable environment. His “Hacker Way” letter showed a bias for action over deliberation in the form of “shipping code,” because he had little else to worry about. Facebook could be built fast, because it was built on top of technology that was slowly developed over decades.

The origins of modern computing are complex, with breakthroughs in multiple fields eventually converging into a single technology. Alan Turing and Claude Shannon provided much of the theoretical basis for digital computing in the 1930s and 40s. Yet the vacuum tube technology at the time only allowed for big, clunky machines that were very limited.

A hardware breakthrough came in 1948, when John Bardeen, William Shockley and Walter Brattain invented the transistor, followed by Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce’s development of the integrated circuit in the late 1960s. The first computers were connected to the Internet a decade later and, a generation after that, Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web.

All of this happened very slowly but, by the time Mark Zuckerberg became aware of it all, it was just part of the landscape. Much like older generations grew up with the Interstate Highway System and took for granted that they could ride freely on it, Millennial hackers grew up in a period of technological, not to mention political, stability.

The Dangers Of Disruption

Mark Zuckerberg founded Facebook with a bold idea. “We believe that a more open world is a better world because people with more information can make better decisions and have a greater impact,” he wrote. That vision was central to how he built the company and its products. He believed that enabling broader and more efficient communication would foster a deeper and more complete understanding.

Yet the world looks much different when your vantage point is a technology company in Menlo Park, California then it does from, say, a dacha outside Moscow. If you are an aging authoritarian who is somewhat frustrated by your place in the world rather than a young, hubristic entrepreneur, you may take a dimmer view on things.

For many, if not most, people on earth, the world is often a dark and dangerous place and the best defense is often to go on offense. From that vantage point, an open information system is less an opportunity to promote better understanding and more of a vulnerability you can leverage to exploit your enemy.

In fact, the House of Representatives Committee on Intelligence found that agents of the Russian government used the open nature of Facebook and other social media outlets to spread misinformation and sow discord. That’s the problem with moving fast and breaking things. If you’re not careful, you inevitably end up breaking something important.

This principle will become even more important in the years ahead as the potential for serious disruption increases markedly.

The Four Disruptive Shifts Of The Next Decade

While the era that shaped millennials like Mark Zuckerberg was mostly stable, the next decade is likely to be one of the most turbulent in history, with massive shifts in demography, resources, technology and migration. Each one of these has the potential to be destabilizing, the confluence of all four courts disaster and demands that we tread carefully.

Consider the demographic shift caused by the Millennials and Gen Z’ers coming of age. The last time we had a similar generational transition was with the Baby Boomers in the 1960s, which saw more than its share of social and political strife. The shift in values that will take place over the next ten years or so is likely to be similar in scale and scope.

Yet that’s just the start. We will also be shifting in resources from fossil fuels to renewables, in technology from bits to atoms and in migration globally from south to north and from rural to urban areas. The last time we had so many important structural changes going on at once it was the 1920s and that, as we should remember, did not turn out well.

It’s probably no accident that today, much like a century ago, we seem to yearn for “a return to normalcy.” The past two decades have been exhausting, with global terrorism, a massive financial meltdown and now a pandemic fraying our nerves and heightening our sense of vulnerability.

Still, I can’t help feeling that the lessons of the recent past can serve us well in creating a better future.

We Need To Rededicate Ourselves Tackling Grand Challenges

In Daniel Kahneman’s book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, he explained that we have two modes of thinking. The first is fast and intuitive. The second is slow and deliberative. His point wasn’t that one was better than the other, but that both have their purpose and we need to learn how to use both effectively. In many ways, the two go hand-in-hand.

One thing that is often overlooked is that to think fast effectively often takes years of preparation. Certain professions, such as surgeons and pilots, train for years to hone their instincts so that they will be able to react quickly and appropriately in an emergency. In many ways, you can’t think fast without first having thought slow.

Innovation is the same way. We were able to develop coronavirus vaccines in record time because of the years of slow, painstaking work by Katalin Karikó and others like her, much like how Mark Zuckerberg was able to “move fast and break things” because of the decades of breakthroughs it took to develop the technology that he “hacked.”

Today, as the digital era is ending, we need to rededicate ourselves to innovating slow. Just as our investment in things like the human genome project has returned hundreds of times what we put into it, our investment in the grand challenges of the future will enable countless new (hopefully more modest) Zuckerbergs to wax poetic about “hacker culture.”

Innovation is never a single event. It is a process of discovery, engineering and transformation and those things never happen in one place or at one time. That’s why we need to innovate fast and slow, build healthy collaborations and set our sights a bit higher.

— Article courtesy of the Digital Tonto blog
— Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Amazon Changes Everything in a New Way

Leave a reply

The arrival of the Internet began major disruption to decades old methods of consumer packaged goods (CPG) distribution. The tried and true method of manufactures selling to a collection of wholesalers, who then sold the product on a range of retailers began to be reexamined. We saw the arrival of online retailers like Amazon who sought to compete with brick and mortar retailers, trying to offer a wider selection while also offering potentially a more convenient (and possibly cheaper) shopping experience for a few (or possibly for many). We saw retailers experiment with selling on Amazon (adding an extra layer of intermediation) and grocery stores experiment with online ordering and local delivery.

But at the same, in 2010 we saw manufacturers like P&G start to experiment with selling direct to consumer over the Internet via sites like pgshop.com and then in 2013 P&G started selling their wares on Amazon. Below is a screenshot of a Pampers product listing on Amazon:

As you can imagine, when companies like P&G start selling direct to consumers and via Amazon, this makes traditional retailers nervous. And while maybe some day their nervousness will translate into major volume declines, we’re probably not quite there, yet. But for manufacturers, the possibility of selling direct to consumers or via Amazon changes everything. It changes everything because it requires companies selling consumer goods to build new marketing capabilities, and possibly even new manufacturing and distribution capabilities as well.

Here we have an example of a Sweet and Salty Box being sold to consumers via Amazon by Frito Lay. Compare this with a P&G Pampers page on Amazon and you’ll see that Frito Lay is still learning how to market via the Amazon channel and hasn’t completely figured out how to optimize the experience they create for consumers or likely how to maximize their conversion. But, you may also notice that the Amazon channel offers Frito Lay the opportunity to sell something they probably couldn’t sell in a Krogers, or Whole Foods, or Tesco, or 7-11.

In both of these examples, Amazon is taking and selling the inventory much as a grocery store would, but the customer wants, needs and expectations in the Amazon channel are different, and the skills to effectively market in this channel are different too. These are the reasons that Amazon changes everything for CPG companies. As Amazon continues to grow in importance as a channel for nearly everything, and as other sites like Facebook make a stronger push into eCommerce, and as consumer preferences for where and how they want to buy things changes, it presents a great opportunity for the forward thinking among us to take existing products and create new offerings that resonate with consumers showing a preference for existing and emerging digital channels and to create entirely new solutions that may involve a new product or possibly move beyond a product. Companies in CPG must continue to ask themselves:

What is possible online that isn’t possible in-store?
What do online shoppers want that is different than in-store shoppers?
If we were to move beyond the confines of the product (and how it is packaged and presented), what would resonate with this type of consumer?

You can see on the Pampers page on Amazon above they’ve done a number of different things without changing the product:

Offering a range of product quantities
Coupons
Amazon Dash buttons (push the button and it automatically orders for you)
Etc.

And Frito Lay took their existing products and re-packaged them in a different way to suit the capabilities and needs of the channel because selling one individual bag of Doritos doesn’t make economic sense (and so Amazon won’t let you do it unless it is part of a larger Prime Pantry box).

If you were in charge, and had the product range that P&G or Frito Lay have, what would you do to optimize your results in the Amazon channel, or even more broadly in a direct to consumer context?

Please add your comments below.

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Pull Marketing – Upside Down Social Web Design

Leave a reply

Picking up where my hugely popular article ‘Rise of the Social Business Architect‘ (PDF) leaves off, I thought I would examine the world of web design in a world where the tools of social media are becoming increasingly important and integrated into how business gets done (and even how searching and search results are done).

When it comes to putting up a web site, most entrepreneurs and marketers unfortunately look at it from their perspective (what do I want to say?) instead of from their potential customers’ perspective (what do they want or need to know?). This causes most entrepreneurs and marketers to start building web sites for their new product or service in the same basic way (a push marketing approach).

First, they go out and hire a web designer to build them a web site, only to have the web designer ask them three main questions:

1. What kind of visual design are you looking for? (…and what are your favorite web sites and why?)

2. Do you need the web site to run on any particular technology platform?

3. What kinds of content do you have? (…and what is your menu structure going to be?)

The third question often provokes a deer in the headlights kind of response – “Oh shoot, we have to write something” – and then after the entrepreneur or marketer recovers from the shock they think about what they want to say.

The entrepreneur or marketer hastily runs off and sketches out a set of pages that they want to have (or they use another site as a template) and then they write (or hire someone to write) copy for each page, and when the copy is written and the design is complete they have someone build the web site using the design and content as a guide.

The end result is a web site that stands alone as a new domain in the digital wilderness, disconnected from the rest of the digital world. This may be great for putting on business cards and email signatures, but the chances are low of someone finding the new web site and actually caring about the product or service.

Frustrated that nobody is coming to the new web site, maybe the marketer or entrepreneur creates a Facebook page or a Twitter account, but then those likely sit there – lacking a clear purpose or a point of conversation.

Still trying to provoke activity on their web site, maybe the marketer/entrepreneur starts to create deeper level content that their potential customers might actually care about, with the potential of moving them along the customer purchasing journey, and put it on the site. When few people find the new content that the marketer/entrepreneur created at great time and/or expense, maybe they buy some pay-per-click advertising (PPC) to drive people to it, wondering when the financial bleeding will stop.

Finally, maybe they place the content off-site in places where potential customers actually gather and might find it (and find the new web site as a result).

What would happen if you flipped the traditional push marketing web design paradigm around and used a pull marketing approach instead?

I would contend that is exactly what you should do if you want to build a social business, and to prove it, over the next couple of months I will flip the traditional web site design model on its and head and use an upside down social web design model for my new domain in the wilderness – http://b2bpull.com – which will be the home of a new digital agency focused on b2b pull marketing strategy and execution services.

So what does an upside down social web design approach look like?

Well, the first key is to keep the customer at the center of your plans, not the product or service you plan to offer. My current web site – https://bradenkelley.com – is all about me – my thinking, my services, my creations, etc. I am the product, and I sit at the center. The web site in this evolving case study – http://b2bpull.com – will be built with b2b marketing managers at the center, and now I’ll lay out what the steps in a pull marketing approach to social web site design should be.

Blackjack!

Here are the 21 steps to building an Upside Down Social Web Design:

While you are exploring what product or service to offer to potential customers, also explore how they shop for the kind of product or service you are going to offer. Seek to understand where their areas of confusion are, and what kinds of information they seek out to help them make the decisions about which companies to consider and which products or services they are interested in learning more about.

Create a simple landing page that tells people what is coming soon, and that contains a simple form asking people what they’d like to know more about. If you go to http://b2bpull.com now you will find not a web site, but a landing page asking people what they’d like to know about b2b pull marketing. So, please let me know what you’d like to know about using content to drive an increase in inbound sales leads, and I’ll work to build answers to share with the world.

Create a simple logo (you can change this later) that is a square image (this is for use as a profile photo in any profiles you create – i.e. Twitter/Facebook)

If your prospective customers are on Twitter, then create an account on Twitter – if they are not, then skip this step. At a minimum, populate your profile with a description of your product or service, a profile image, the URL of your landing page, and a background image to make your profile more visually engaging and distinctive. Send a tweet or two letting people know what you’re planning to do and inquiring what people would like to know more about (as it relates to your specialty area). Do research to find out who else tweets interesting things about your specialty and start following them. Retweet one or two interesting things that they share (every day) – be sure and use appropriate #hashtags in your re-tweets to help people find them.

If your prospective customers are on Facebook, then create a Facebook page and at a minimum populate it with a profile photo, a cover image, and an about us. If your prospective customers do not spend time on Facebook, then skip this step. Add links to the one or two interesting things that you find on Twitter each day that relate to your specialty area. That will start giving you some interesting content on your Facebook page (instead of it staying blank), feed it into your fans’ Facebook content streams, and give people an idea of what to expect in the future.

Look for interesting groups on Linkedin that focus on your specialty area and join them. Consider starting your own Linkedin group. See what people are sharing in the groups you join. Consider sharing some of what you find on Twitter in the discussions area of the groups that you join (or create) to add value.

Scour the web for sites and blogs in your specialty area that are ideally independent of any one company, publish interesting content, and have multiple contributing authors. Ask your friends and network connections in your specialty area for recommendations too. Use Alexa, Compete, and other tools to identify which of the sites get the most traffic.

Refer to your research in step #1 to identify which topics in your specialty area that customers look for information on the most to help them further their progress along their purchasing journey. Hopefully one or more of these topics you will have deep knowledge and expertise on. Commit to writing a white paper on one of these topics.

See if one or more of the sites in step #7 will allow you publish an article announcing your research effort for this white paper on their web site in order to build interest and hopefully participation in this effort.

Write the white paper (ideally with contributions from current or prospective customers), and when complete, create one or more articles for digital publication from each white paper.

Add another simple form to your landing page for people to fill out with name/company/title/email/phone in order to download the white paper (make phone optional) and ask their permission (with a check box) to send them information about an upcoming webinar to discuss its findings.

Create an electronic presentation to share the findings of the white paper you’ve created. Be sure to embed contact details in it and a link to your landing page (which will become your web site later).

Create accounts on presentation sharing sites like Slideshare and Scribd and share the presentation you’ve created. Be sure that you fill out your profile on these sites and include a link to your landing page as part of your profile if possible.

Inquire with the most promising sites identified in step #7 to find out if they accept article submissions and submit one or more of the articles you created from your white paper.

Identify short snippets from the white paper and articles that work well as quotes or insights and will fit into status updates on Twitter, Facebook, Linkedin, Google+, or other communities where it makes sense to share them. Be sure and include a shortened url (bit.ly, su.pr, ow.ly, etc.) to the article, presentation, or white paper.

Look for professional associations and complimentary vendors in your specialty area that conduct regular webinars and ask if they would be interested in doing a webinar with you to share the findings of your white paper with their members or current/prospective customers. If you do a webinar, be sure that they record the webinar and share the link with you to the recording (and hopefully the email list of attendees). Check to see if they can provide a recording of the webinar in a video format that you can share. If you can’t find someone to do a webinar with to share your findings, consider doing one yourself. While having a large number of people attend live is helpful, what is more important here is the recording (you can help potential customers find this 24/7/365).

Add the link to the webinar recording to your landing page.

Create an account on YouTube and possibly also on Vimeo and populate your profile in a similar manner to Twitter (not neglecting to link to relevant assets). Upload the video file from the webinar (if you were able to get one), plus add it to your Facebook page if you’ve created one. If you are comfortable in front of the camera, consider recording a separate video segment highlighting the key findings from your white paper to upload to your video channels.

Be sure and share links to the white paper, the webinar, the webinar recording, and any articles you created from the white paper through your Twitter, Facebook, Linkedin, and any other communities linked to your subject matter.

Repeat as many times as necessary until you have enough content to build your web site.

Last but not least, design and build your web site, incorporating all of the content elements that you created. Not only will it be easier to build the web site because you have already built a lot of the content required to populate any design your web designer might come up with, but the quality of your web design may improve and be more social because the designer will have a clearer idea of what you are selling and the goals you are trying to achieve with your new web site.

The importance of social media in the internet ecosystem is only continuing to grow, and so it is time to design web sites in a different, more social way. The way that people buy things, especially more complicated products and services with longer cycles (particularly B2B products) is changing as well. This will make marketing organizations focus more on pull marketing and less on push marketing. This will force marketers and entrepreneurs to focus less on building beautiful, flash-driven web designs and more on building valuable, socially-driven, content-rich ecosystems (of which the web site is only a part).

In short, the future of marketing belongs to marketers who are good at creating social pull.

So, how strong is your social pull?

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Dumping Facebook Ads the Obvious Choice for GM

Leave a reply

The twittersphere erupted with news of GM’s announcement that it was refusing to pay for 2013 Super Bowl advertisements and $10 Million worth of advertising on Facebook.

Much of the popular press and self-proclaimed social media experts are jumping on the bandwagon and calling GM “idiots” for ending their advertising of Facebook and talking about how GM “doesn’t get” social media. If you listen to the amount of noise out there you would think that there was consensus that GM was wrong in making these moves.

I disagree. GM is making the right move.

Companies need to re-think how they spend money on marketing and advertising to make money in the showroom. Traditional advertising is becoming more expensive all the time and as the saying goes “I know I’m wasting half of the money I spend on advertising, only I don’t know which half.” The key here is that with advertising you pay to blast everyone that sees it with a single message – including people who just bought what you sell and those who will never buy what you sell just to hit the people who are considering a purchase of what you sell. As a result it is expensive and nearly impossible to place the right message with the right people at the time (and only those people). So I am not surprised at all that GM is re-evaluating its advertising spend, possibly investing more (not less) in the future in social media. Done well, you can be more impactful with pull marketing and social media than you can with push marketing and advertising.

So, personally it seems odd to me that so-called social media experts are in favor of a company spending money advertising on social networks. Wouldn’t it be smarter for them to advocate that GM spend money on build an interactive, engagement-driving social media campaign instead of spending money on advertising?

Something like the Chevy Game Time App?

Wait a minute, did the same company that doesn’t “get social media” launch an app built by hometown company – Detroit Labs – before Super Bowl 2012 that rocketed into the Top 10 free apps for the iPhone on Apple’s App Store (a top 10 that included Facebook and Instagram)?

“For all intents and purposes, all of the expectations that we had and that GM had were far exceeded… in a positive way!”

– Henry Balanon, Detroit Labs Co-Founder

Hmmmm…

First let’s be clear. Social networks and social media are two separate things, but people talk about them as is if they were one thing.

A social network is a place where people connect online and interact, whereas social media is content that is created to be shared. But, many so-called social media experts confuse the two, and confuse advertising with social media too. Advertising on a social network is not a social media strategy – it’s still advertising. Identifying the content that you should place on your Facebook page or other digital destination and creating a reason for people to tell others that they should come to that digital destination, well that’s a social media strategy.

Now, I must disclose that I specialize in helping companies creating pull marketing strategies to drive an increase in inbound sales leads by researching the customer purchasing journey online and then helping them attract and engage customers, partners, or employees by placing the right content in the right places at the right time. Part of this is achieved by using my proprietary single content input, multiple content output methodology and yes, that sometimes includes using social media. But social media is a tool not a religion, and it needs to be used only when appropriate.

I think GM made the right call in ceasing to advertise on the Super Bowl and Facebook and here’s why:

Super Bowl advertisements are expensive and for GM much of the cost is allocated against people who will probably NEVER buy a GM car

Facebook advertising is not very prominent or engaging

Their Chevy Game Time App experience should have given GM an idea that next year they can drive huge engagement during the Super Bowl (without advertising)

If GM is so clueless at social media, then why does the Facebook page for Chevrolet look so much better than the Facebook page for Ford or Toyota or Dodge. Honda is the only one I looked at amongst the car companies that had a more social feel at first glance, oh and Honda has the most likes of these companies too – go figure. But the engagement of people on Facebook around these brands is tiny in comparison to BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Harley-Davidson – both in terms of the numbers of likes and the number of people talking about them.

So, yes GM still has things to learn about engaging on social media (and about building better products too), but then so does every company. Social media and pull marketing are two new tools in the toolbox for every CMO, brand manager, and product marketer, but as long as we all continue to instrument for learning, as marketers we will continue to get better at utilizing these new tools to attract, engage, and retain the people who will love our products and services as much as we do.

Keep innovating!

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Who is in Your Social Media Band?

Leave a reply

It used to be that when you formed a rock band to seek fame and fortune, all you had to do was find a lead singer, a guitarist, a bass player, a drummer, and maybe another guitarist or a keyboard player if you wanted a richer sound. But the digital age presents a level of complexity and opportunity that John, Paul, and Ringo never had to deal with.

If video killed the radio star, or tried to, then YouTube will certainly finish the job.

In the old days (come on, rock music is less than 100 years old), bands played at their local high school, then maybe the local club circuit, recorded a demo and sent off demo tapes, and finally if they were lucky they were ‘discovered’ by a record exec and signed to a record deal.

In the digital age, aspiring rock stars need to consider the social media and marketing skills of potential band mates as much as they scrutinize their skill with a particular musical instrument. In the digital age your skills with YouTube are almost more likely to make you a rock star then your skills with a guitar.

Just look at Pomplamoose – nearly 80 million video views and 340,000 subscribers. They have more YouTube subscribers than mega-stars Coldplay.

If we look at a new song as an invention and at my Innovation is All About Value framework through a music lens, you will quickly see why social media and creativity are so important in the music business and why new singers and bands can seemingly come from nowhere on the Internet.

1. Value Creation

A new song (Is the song any good?)

2. Value Access

How easy do you make it for people to find this new song, listen to it and buy it?

3. Value Translation

Do you do a good job of making people want to add the song to their playlists and to share the song with others? Do you engage them and make the song a part of them?

The power of #3 is magnified on the Internet (both if you do it well or poorly). Just look at the fact that Gotye created an AWESOME song ‘Somebody That I Used to Know’ and the video for it has received 600,000 page views, but a little known Canadian band Walk Off The Earth released a YouTube video covering the song and their cover has generated 83 million page views and an appearance on The Ellen DeGeneres Show.

Why?

More passion, and a better, more engaging story (ultimately better value translation that was worth sharing).

So all you teenyboppers out there putting together the next great rock band, beware. In this new digital reality we all live in, you can’t think just about guitar, vocals, bass, drums, and keyboards. You must also think about who in the band you are considering putting together (unless you actually have money to pay someone) will make you look awesome on:

1. YouTube
2. MySpace Music
3. Twitter
4. Facebook
5. Band Web Site
6. Other places (Spotify, iTunes, etc.)

Yes, I said MySpace. The site remains incredibly relevant despite being eclipsed by Facebook thanks to its understanding of how to help bands create valuable pages for fans. Facebook still sucks at this. If I were Google and didn’t want Google+ to die a slow death, I would buy MySpace and incorporate the Music capabilities into Google+. It would make a great pairing with YouTube. They might want to buy Spotify while they are at it to bolster their unfortunately pathetic Google Play offering.

One other interesting contrast to draw between the successful bands spawned by YouTube versus the successful bands spawned by the old guard. YouTube successes tend to be very human and engaging in their approach, while old guard bands tend to be very aloof, distant, and well-packaged.

What kind of musical band and social media band will you be?

Here are the two different ‘Somebody That I Used To Know’ videos, starting with the original by Gotye:

Followed by the Walk Off the Earth cover:

Image Credit: Foxhound Studio

Sign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.

Human-Centered Change and Innovation

Innovation, change and transformation thought leadership, lovingly curated by Braden Kelley

Tag Archives: facebook

Why CIOs Should Co-Lead Customer Experience

1. Art of the Possible

2. Understanding Level of Effort and Dependencies for Prioritization and Planning

3. Measuring CX

4. True End-to-End Perspective

5. Changing the Way IT Operates

Growing Your Conversational Commerce Capability

How to Optimize the Latest Major Digital Touchpoint

1. The Core of Conversational Commerce is Very Similar to Search.

2. The Next Step of Conversational Commerce is About Enabling Transactions.

3. In Text Conversations, You Generally Know Your Customer.

4. You Can Make the Language Parsing Easier by Giving Multiple-choice Options.

5. It Doesn’t Have to be Perfect.

6. Develop a Core Conversational Engine, and Leverage it Across Many Different Touchpoints

Your Brand Isn’t the Problem

Innovation Requires Going Fast, Slow and Meta

The Luxury Of Stability

The Dangers Of Disruption

The Four Disruptive Shifts Of The Next Decade

We Need To Rededicate Ourselves Tackling Grand Challenges

Amazon Changes Everything in a New Way