« June 2007 | Main | August 2007 »
Just got the hardcover of The Age of Conversation in (buy), and I must say that I'm very pleased with the quality of the printing and binding. As is becoming a custom with the authors, here's a picture of me with the book.
And because she's quite a bit cuter than I, here's a picture of my daughter with the book.
The Age of Conversation is yours, sweetie. I'm just keeping it warm for you until you're old enough to take it over. - Cam Beck
What type of TV commercials do scores of people actually want to watch?
If you said "movie trailers," move to the head of the class. While watching television, viewers are already in "entertainment mode," so a few commercials about more entertainment generally is more relevant to them than, say, a commercial about medical ointment (although an overabundance of any commercial will try anyone's patience). What does this mean to the rest of us who don't market movies?
While watching Food Network's Iron Chef last night, I was treated to a 30-second commercial that actually made a little sense. The commercial started as a trailer to Bourne Ultimatum, the third movie in a series starring Matt Damon as a former assassin on the run from his old employer. It featured an exciting car chase (a lynchpin of the series) with lots of bumps, suspenseful music, and one hair-raising crash at the end.
Just as we think we're going to get a payoff explaining when the movie would be in theaters, we see a man get out of the SUV that just crashed, very relieved to be unharmed.
"Holy..."
Cut to the VW logo with a safety message.
Watch the video here.
This commercial exemplified much of what Chip and Dan Heath talk about in their book, Made to Stick.
It's simple. The message is "safety." We're not overburdened with all of the features and functions that make the auto safe.
It's unexpected. We're led to believe we're watching a movie trailer, so we are drawn to pay attention.
It's concrete. Most of us know what it's like to be in a crash, or else we know others who do. We didn't need to hear about statistics and five-star ratings (although if VW wanted to make that an accessory of the concrete message to show credibility, that would be okay).
It's an emotional story. Supported by the soundtrack, we're drawn into the experience of the driver, who looked just very relieved to have escaped death (as we all would be). We can see ourselves in his position. At the end of experience, all we'd be able to say to ourselves is, like the driver, "Holy..."
I don't know if this commercial was a product of the willful application of the book's themes, but the creative team that developed it certainly made use of them. While we can't all utilize our product in the exact same manner, we can make use of many the principles set forth in Made to Stick.
Have you seen the commercial? What do you think? Was it done effectively? How can you incorporate this strategy in your messaging? - Cam Beck
I copied and pasted the "Terms of Use" into a Word document, only to discover that it spans for 17 pages -- after I reduced the size of the text by 1 pt.
Of course I didn't read it. Are you kidding me? Who would?
And since the number of people who would is so small as to render them statistically insignificant, why can't companies who insist on putting us through this just use short, plain language?
Not to be mean, but this reminds me of the old joke that starts, "What do you call 50 lawyers at the bottom of a pool..." (See also Roger's post on his efforts to get a patent). - Cam Beck
Last November I took a critical look at Squidoo, and I admitted that I didn't understand how this could be considered valuable to most users. Today I have the bittersweet responsibility to admit my error. Squidoo has proved to me its value.
What changed my mind?
On Monday I will have to give a staff presentation to the agency for which I work, Click Here. I've never been nervous speaking in front of people, but I also am under no illusions that I am a "great" speaker (In fact, my execution normally rises to the level of "barely adequate"). However, knowing how changing that can impact my career, I endeavored to improve.
But where to start?
Curiously, I started at Squidoo, the platform I previously questioned. I figured I could use the expertise of someone who aggregated and intelligently organized a lot of information about public speaking. At the top of my search, I came across a very useful lens by speaking coach Lisa Braithwaite. So impressed was I by this lens, I subscribed to her blog.
With renewed appreciation for Seth Godin's "post-bust brainchild," I decided I would build a lens for Chip and Dan Heath's book, Made to Stick (blog), based on my previous review. I was a bit sad when I found out that the URL I wanted to create the review was already taken by John W. McKenna (blog), but that he hadn't done anything with the lens yet. Not certain why this was so, I pointed him to the analysis (PDF) I created for the book, and he graciously linked to it from his lens while he finishes his own analysis.
But something interesting happened when he changed his lens. He also linked to reviews he's done on other business books (he has lenses for each one), and I discovered his work to be very thoughtful and concise. I will certainly consider reading the books he recommends (and, like Lisa, he'll be added to our blogroll).
Squidoo's tools make it easy for John to link to all of his reviews, and all one must do is have interest in one of them to have an entire world of new books opened to him.
If you happen to read this, Seth, I humbly apologize for my earlier error. I have seen the light.
For everyone else, if you're interested in using Squidoo as a teaching tool, please consider visiting "How to Mentor through Lenses," which was created by my brother, Gannon. If you've previously discounted Squidoo, I would encourage you to once again push the limits of your comfort zone and give it another try. - Cam Beck
How do you get the attention of your customers? What is it that you do that makes them want to come back?
Last week I visited Chick-fil-A, an establishment I frequent as often as I can, to meet with some friends for breakfast. Chick-fil-A, who is a client (I try to patronize our clients whenever feasible -- you have to believe in what you do), has long-established reputation for being friendly in its service to and support of families, but I was still surprised when I came across this:
This display doesn't appear to be of Chick-fil-A stock, but as a father of an infant, I really had to marvel in appreciation of the gesture, which was provided at no charge to the consumers. My daughter doesn't eat Cheerios yet, but when she does, I'd be more likely to visit a breakfast spot that will provide her with something to do.
Most restaurants supply coloring mats and crayons or kid's meals for the older kids, but many of them, besides providing seats for them, ignore the needs of the infants. Either they don't realize or don't think it's important that doing something small like this will also meet the needs of the parents, who want as much as anybody to enjoy a relaxing meal without having to constantly be entertaining.
Notably, this presents a more relaxing environment for the other patrons, as well.
Ignoring the "capital costs" of no more than $40 for the basket, liner and disposable containers, each Sam's-sized box of Cheerios costs, what... 5 dollars?
Sure. Just $5 -- and actually caring about your customers' experience. - Cam Beck
Note: I wanted to post this last week, but I thought it more prudent to do it after I posted my "10-Somewhat Flexible Laws of Blogging about Companies" (with apologies to John Maxwell). I wrote that post originally, knowing that I would later write about a client, to follow my own advice, which was to set a norm that you and I can reference so that we can all objectively see whether my actions square with the standard I set.
I just learned that Time Warner is about to close down Business 2.0. I've always loved this magazine because it covered more than just the typical stuff you get in magazines like Business Week. You'd think Time Warner could look at some of their other properties (say like AOL) and see that Business 2.0 has more potential.
I should have known this was going to happen when they combined the Business 2.0 site with CNN Money. Yeah, it's owned by the same people and they rolled other publications into CNN Money but to me it doesn't seem like a good fit. I would think Business 2.0 readers are more inclined to get their information online than the other publications. I have no data to back that up, just my gut.
There's a campaign to save Business 2.0 launched through Facebook. It's a great way to use a social network to get the word out and show support. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I don't have a Facebook account. I'm creating one today, however, not only because I should have had one a long time ago, but to join this group.
Help us keep Business 2.0 open. Join the Facebook group to save Business 2.0 and while your at it, Digg the article. - Paul Herring
A few interesting things are going on.
Forget about me. Let's talk about you.
I like David Armano's effort here to turn the "8 Random Things About Me" meme on its head. Instead, he's asking for "8 Random Things About You." I've now been tagged twice, and I've determined that people really don't want anything "random," but "interesting," or else we'd know the shoe sizes, eye colors and dirty secrets of a whole lot of bloggers who have participated. If you've been tagged, go over there and support this effort.
Drew McLellan. Man or Superman?
This guy is tenacious. In addition to his participation on his own blog and The Age of Conversation, Drew posts at Marketing Profs: Daily Fix, Iowa Biz, Small Business Branding, and Branding Wire. Drew, am I missing anything?
Oh yeah. He just runs his own marketing agency that publishes its own newsletter.
You're the man, Drew. You're the man, indeed.
Quit Being Such a Wuss
After reading posts or comments by Stephen Denny, Ryan Karpeles, and Lewis Green (not to mention Ann Handley, Mack Collier, David Reich and others), impeaching us to get off the fence and take a side already, Brian Clark of Copyblogger comes out and writes a brilliant treatise on the subject. Check it out.
The Gift That Keeps On Giving
CK is giving out copies of The Age of Conversation to heads of marketing for several companies her readers felt desperately needed to read it. My pick? Wal-Mart. If CMO Stephen Quinn responds intelligently to the gift, I will fall out of my chair.
I have a lot of respect for Wal-Mart (as my comments over at Lewis' blog will show). Here's hoping I fall out of my chair.
The Flavor of 102 Geniuses
Steve Woodruff did an amazing job summarizing the chapters in The Age of Conversation. Check them out.
Yes, I realize there are 103 authors. Don't rub it in.
Say What You Mean and Mean What You Say
Last week, I started a tagline meme and called it "optional." I tagged Roger, Lewis, Tim, Paul, and Mack. So far, none have responded.
I was just kidding about the "optional" thing, guys. Snap to it. ;)
- Cam Beck
Melissa Tarquini of Boxes and Arrows wrote a good article about common myths that exist concerning designing a Web page that requires users to scroll down "below the fold." It's well written and well considered, but it's important to note what wasn't said just as much as what was, lest readers get the wrong impression.
Tarquini's principle claim is that "the fold doesn't matter in certain contexts." However, this claim is flat out wrong. The fact of the matter is, the fold does matter. Always. And Nielsen says so. But with all the compromises that must be made when designing websites, designing to put content below the fold might be the best option available. It certainly seems to be the case for the AOL portal page (which Tarquini mentions), where several titillating content regions perform well.
A more complete commentary of Nielsen's point is as follows:
"The change from 1994 [to 1997] is that scrolling is no longer a usability disaster for navigation pages. Scrolling still reduces usability, but all design involves trade-offs, and the argument against scrolling is no longer as strong as it used to be. Thus, pages that can be markedly improved with a scrolling design may be made as long as necessary, though it should be a rare exception to go beyond three screenfuls on an average monitor."
In fact, if we're to take the whole of Nielsen's position, much of Tarquini's thesis is about the exception to user behavior, not the rule. According to Prioritizing Web Usability, which Nielsen wrote with Hoa Loranger, for the first visit to a homepage, only 23% of users scrolled. On the fourth and later visits, that number fell to 14%.
However, on the search engine results page (which I would wager, with its dynamic content, compares more favorably to the type of page Tarquini was specifically talking about), 47% of users scrolled.
That's a difference in audience behavior large enough to make me reconsider how I design a page. It's important, then, to identify the type of page you are designing before making decisions based on blanket assumption that may or may not apply to everyone.
All this means is that when designing websites, you have to accommodate different things according to the goals of the organization and the wants, needs and tendencies of a diverse group of users. People don't all navigate websites in the same way. If you are going to design a website that will require scrolling to access certain types of content, be sure to put the highest priority content above the fold, conform to usability best practices (which Tarquini also mentioned), and don't confuse the ability to do something with the practice's acceptability.
Without a doubt, Tarquini's point applies foursquare to the types of pages she is specifically talking about, and given the user behavior she describes, it is apparent to me that, even without looking at the page, AOL is doing a fine job with it. Let's just be careful about the inferences we draw from her example. - Cam Beck
Note: To be fair to Tarquini, I think her article shows a fundamental understanding that the fold does matter, because she points out later in the article, in general terms, several things that should always be above the fold. Her statement that we have "documented evidence that the fold really doesn't matter in certain contexts" should be read with the context of the entire article in mind.
Hat tip to Jason Fincanon.
My daughter has been saving her allowance up for (apparently) the latest fad, Webkinz. Webkinz are basically stuffed animals that you come with a code that allows you to adopt them online and play with them in a virtual world. The virtual world is full of all types of games and virtual accessories that you can buy for your pet with kinzcash, which can be earned by taking quizzes, playing games and I'm guessing can be exchanged for real cash. Kids can also play meet friends pets online and have them play together in a vitual world.
A lot of attention is being paid to Second Life, and a lot of companies are setting up virtual environments. It only took Webkinz half the time to get the same number of registered users. Other toys are getting into the game as well. Classic toys like Barbie and Hot Wheels are revamping their websites to be more than places to advertisements, creating their own virtual worlds.
Makes me wonder if virtual worlds to our kids will be as common as a touch tone telephone is to us. How does this (or does it) affect the way they'll live as adults? - Paul Herring
