We have all asked our friends, families, and co-workers the simple question, “What are you doing?” because communication with those individuals is important for our relationships.  Depending on the time of day, mood, or inflection of tone when asked, the response can vary. And you never know what you’re going to get.  The same is true with the site called Twitter that provides users a forum to answer this one little question – with no more than 140 characters (more detailed description here). 

Jeff called this site to my attention earlier this week, and though I felt the site was slightly egotistical, I decided I should research a little before I made any judgments.  But honestly, to think that Twitterites would want to know what I’m doing “right now” would be very self-centered.   Apparently, Helen A.S. Popkin, a contributor to MSNBC, agrees as she writes “Nobody cares what you’re doing.”

After spending many hours on the site (yes, I take my research seriously) I have to admit that I’ve become addicted to refreshing the public timeline to see the types of answers users are submitting.  Posts occur almost every second, from users all over the world:

• At the Rockies game chatting w/ our sales guys. Fascinated by the lives they lead - tons of travel & critical interactions. [tiny twitter]
• just now remembering to take happy pill. crap. no sleep until… 6am?
• Waiting for the Comcast man to arrive… I wonder if he’ll do anything this time?
• Long day. I am thinking about the alligator physicals and a surgery on a snake tomorrow. My feet are killing me. I need bionic feet.
• Found a Fanta Orange soda in the fridge…haven’t had a Fanta for years, didn’t even know they still existed

Twitter can be used to communicate with others, but why through this medium?  Why not through email or instant messaging?  Is society getting to the point where everyone feels the need to tell anyone interested what they’re up to?  And why do we get so caught up in the information provided by the online communities we participate in?

It’s highly unlikely that any of my family or friends will adopt Twitter.  They follow the mindset of “I’m already using this site – I don’t want to keep up with another,” and I can’t say that I blame them.  I have too many accounts, more than I’d like to admit, but I’m intrigued by Twitter now (Thanks Jeff…).  As it’s new to me, I’ll keep playing with the site and see how it I feel about it later on down the line. 

But for now, I’m closing the browser and getting back to work.

In these days of technology marketing, many marketers dream of going “viral.” Ahhh yes. Your video, so loved that it is sent by one person to 10, and by those 10 to 10 more … becoming a virtual phenomenon.

I recently read a blog post from Ad Age about Diesel’s latest viral campaign. No, I wasn’t a recipient of the viral campaign. Apparently I’m not young and hip enough to wear Diesel clothing. Marketing such trendy fashion to me could in fact tarnish their otherwise “cool” brand.

Anyway. This campaign is crazy (check out the ransom video). Essentially, what they did was stage a kidnapping that played out in video on their website. Two young and beautiful women (the “Two Heidies” as they were called) steal a Diesel underwear collection, kidnap the sales manager and lock themselves in a hotel room saying that they want to be “famous supermodels.”

In their demands they say that they want to be put in Diesel’s next advertising campaign and want the name ‘Diesel’ changed to ‘Heidies’ … because it’s “much younger, cooler, fresher…” They give until Friday or they will destroy the stolen underwear collection.

For the next five days, visitors to the site were encouraged to participate. One such way to get in on the action was to submit your name, which would be spelled out and placed between “the Heidies”. Users were also permitted to request things of the Heidies, such as “Have a pillow fight.” Imagine that.

The production was indeed elaborate, but it paid off for Diesel. This has to be the most innovative viral marketing campaigns that I have heard of.

Welcoming the Customer with Communication Done Right
In Part I, I described the challenges large corporations face in communicating effectively with customers throughout the customer lifecycle.  I also showed an example of addressing these challenges through content management only, not communication, in customer support. Well in Part Deux, I’m happy to present an example of meeting these challenges well at the critical “welcome” stage.   

Enter the Cingular Service Summary (CSS).  This document (generic version shown) reaches the hands of every new customer and every customer who upgrades/renews a contract—well over 50 million customers since its release in 2005, about 750,000 customers a day.  This highly personalized, dynamically generated document is printed on the fly in the stores, e-mailed to customers, and posted on the website.  It has two purposes:

• Summarize what the customer bought
• Educate the customer about specific issues and questions (bill amount, voicemail set up, etc.) in an easy-to-understand way.

I toiled to redesign this document during a past life with an excellent team at Cingular Wireless (now AT&T).  I’d like to give it a final salute before it evolves into its AT&T form.  Here are a few reasons why I think the CSS is an example of communication mostly done right:

• Concision – Largely because of the reasons listed below, we reduced the original CSS from 2 pages (front and back) to 1 page (front and back).
• Personalized, relevant information – Thanks to sophisticated technology and complex user scenarios, the content of the document changes depending on the user’s account and transaction type.  Also, we deleted information that didn’t summarize the transaction or educate the customer.
• Clearly organized and prioritized – Like information is consolidated in clearly labeled sections. 
• Polished visual design that clarifies the document’s organization – Clear headers, shading, icons, and more make the document easy to scan, and they clearly convey priority.
• Legalese and technical jargon minimized; plain language maximized - At least as best we could with a service as complex as wireless. 
• A start toward consistent, cross-channel communication – This document appears in e-mail and on the web.  It also served as the basis for redesigning materials sent to customers who order online, over the phone, and through other channels.  

Results? Increased customer satisfaction on industry-wide measures and cost savings from reduced calls to the call center.  Also, in surveys customers reported remembering and keeping the CSS, whereas before they reported not realizing they received one.  The document was such a success that Cingular’s Chief Technology Officer (now the CIO for AT&T) mentioned it in his editorial about customer-driven innovation.  

Doing communication right isn’t always easy, but it pays for everyone.

A few weeks ago I was talking to my insurance agent on the phone and I mentioned that I was going on vacation.  At the end of the call, she said to me “Have a great vacation”.  I automatically replied “You Too!!”… then laughed.  I was so used to hearing someone say “have a great day” or something similar that I reacted first and thought later.  Any of you that are Brian Reagan fans will recognize why I thought this was so funny.  He’s a comedian that does a bit about saying the wrong thing at the right time (audio clip in QuickTime.  Seriously, listen to it – it’s worth it!).  It got me thinking about saying the appropriate thing to the appropriate people.

I’m currently taking classes online at Drexel and they constantly send me emails about ‘on campus’ events and parking passes, an announcement obviously meant for people that live in and around Philadelphia.  It would be so easy to just create a database of people who obviously don’t live in PA and filter out those folks when they send these emails.  All they need is a zip code!  It often baffles me why more companies don’t take the time to clean up their data so they’re not saying something ‘inappropriate’ to their audience.  I’ve started ignoring all emails from Drexel – and every once in a while I miss something important.  But, it’s just not worth my time to have to separate the wheat from the chaff.  Drexel should do that for me – at least to some extent.

“Digital Presence”. I think that’s the term I’m looking for. Or maybe Interactive/Digital Brand is more appropriate. Either way, I’m struck by the idea that a company’s website is now only part of their presence online and I’m wondering how important it even is these days. Consider these five very different web presences for Adidas:

Their brand website: http://www.adidas.com/us/shared/home.asp

Their e-commerce website: http://www.shopadidas.com/home/index.jsp

Their Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adidas

Their Myspace page: http://www.myspace.com/adidas

Video of their Second Life island: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5RM3KRHvpo

And this doesn’t include the many Adidas niche websites, microsites, landing pages, video sites, etc. More and more, companies are realizing that their brand needs to live outside the walls of their website and expand into areas where their customers are more likely to be.

So then how important is a company’s website these days? In the Adidas example, if I want to buy some shoes I’ll go to the shopadidas.com website. If I want to find out corporate information about Adidas or the history of the company, I’d go to their Wikipedia listing. If I want to watch their latest commercial I’d go to Youtube. If I’m an Adidas fan and I’m in a social network such as Myspace, Facebook or Second Life, I’d likely find their brand there and have the ability to interact with other Adidas fans.

So the question is, are we going to get back to the point where a corporate website is just a brochure-ware, billboard-style marketing tool that has little to no value? Are we coming full circle on this?

Recently the Pew Internet and American Life Project released a study on technology users, which claims that nearly 50% of Americans fall in the “low-tech” group. Is it just me, or does this number seem quite low for this day and age?

This study definitely warrants a closer inspection. One interesting trait it measures is the user’s attitude toward technology. The low-tech users are broken down into three groups: Inexperienced experimenters, Light but satisfied, Indifferent, and Off the network.  76% of Inexperienced experimenters were likely to be excited by information and communications technologies, as compared with 48% of people on average. How does this in any way categorize a user as “low tech”? Doesn’t enthusiasm for technology (even if you can’t use it or don’t own it) count for something?

In comparison, let’s look at Connected but hassled, members of the mid-range tech group who have broadband and mobile devices, but wish they didn’t. Many members of this group claim to suffer from information overload, and feel they would do just fine without the internet, email or mobile phone.

In the world of web-marketing, where does attitude come to play? As far as marketing goes, isn’t an enthusiastic novice more alluring than a jaded tech-user?

Yesterday was either a watershed day in user generated content or at least an important footnote. The popular user-ranked news website Digg received a “takedown” notice after an article on how to crack the HD-DVD encryption specification was displayed on their website. After receiving the notice the company’s CEO decided to remove the article and suspend the user accounts of those who attempted to repost the article. He explained his motivation to do so as being for the rule of law and not as a direct attack against the Digg user community.

The community disagreed and proceeded to en mass post numerous articles with the encryption specification which by that point had already appeared at numerous locations across the web. The result was that the users had essentially hijacked the website from having any other news appear. When faced with either deleting a significant number of its users from the system or allowing the posting of the content in violation of the “takedown” notice the founder of Digg, Kevin Rose, decided to cast his vote with his users. To the possible detriment of Digg, he has decided to fight any legal action that occurs even if it means the end of the company.

So was the action of yesterday one of democracy on the web or one of mob rule? I am not a fan of overly restrictive copyright rules, and the information was freely available on the internet at numerous locations other than Digg, but Kevin Rose had no choice. Once you cast your company as a community that is primarily run by your users you have to accept that you live by the sword and die by the sword. Perhaps the users of Digg understand that, and are willing to see Digg die what they see as a noble death fighting for what they think is right. But Digg itself had no choice in the end, in the face of a swift and powerful user run protest it could either fight for its users or cancel all their accounts.

The possible repercussions of this on unmoderated user forums, discussion boards and other community based sites may start to be felt in the coming weeks. Or maybe the Digg user community is particularly strident. But its something to note, and could go down as a seminal event in user generated content on the web and who is responsible for the ensuing content.

It’s been a while since my last post, mainly because my family has been a bit pre-occupied. My wife and I had our first child on April 7th, a beautiful girl named Brooke.  I could tell instantly that life would never be the same.  I would also like to take this opportunity to praise my wife for everything she went through and continues to go through.  She is an amazingly strong woman, and an incredible partner in life.

In my last post, I referred to the problem of requirements communication on a software production team as the old ‘Telephone Game.’  The basic idea is that all information communicated between two people gets distorted in some way, even when the most careful words are chosen with the best of intentions. I am sure anyone married or in a serious relationship has had some experience with this.  I know my wife and I have.

Her mom was visiting recently to help with the baby and after dinner one night the family was sitting around the table.

“Can you help my mom and I get on the internet?”

Now, I know that my wife knows how to ‘get on the internet.’  She helps me on a daily basis to look things up, do research, and pay bills.  Anyone who knows me here at the office knows that a sentence like the above is fair game.  So, the next few minutes were a lot of fun.  We all had a good laugh.

What she was referring to was that I had purchased a video cam for our home PC, so that when her mother went home to Iowa, she could still see her Grand-daughter whenever she wanted.  In all fairness, what my wife had said wasn’t really incorrect, just incomplete, because they did get on the internet together the next night.

A serious problem with all human communication is that by the time the message is heard and processed by the other person, it has been translated several times. First, you have to translate whatever you are thinking into words.  This represents the first mutation of the message.  You are expressing yourself with the vocabulary that you are comfortable with, and if you are speaking English that vocabulary is full of words that have more than one meaning, more than word that sounds the same, etc.  Next, the words are spoken, which can introduce tone, accents, inappropriate or confusing pauses (ala Captain Kirk), and so forth.  Next the person or persons you are speaking to must then hear those words and will translate them into their own thoughts that represent what you were trying to say.  (I am sure Dr. Melissa Read has a much more scientific explanation for this.)  In my example from home above, you can see how what my wife was thinking wasn’t exactly what she said, and when you read or hear those words, how they can be interpreted as something completely different.

The same problems exist in the written word, with slightly different mutating elements.  The written word can’t accurately express tone, and usually is presented without facial expressions or body language, which are usually imperative in human expression.  One good thing about the written word is that you take time to think before you write, which a lot of people don’t do before they speak, which can lead to big troubles.

I find it interesting when studying communication, that what you learn in one environment is usually applicable in every other environment.  For example, what you learn at home when learning to communicate with your family, you can usually apply at the office, and vice versa.  Understanding that communication isn’t as easy as it may seem and studying where there might be disconnects is important in all walks of life, and is just as important when talking to your spouse as it is when marketing your company to customers.  Over-confidence in the delivery of your message, and assuming that it was understood as intended can lead to a lot of unintended results.  If you are humble enough to study and learn, you will find golden nuggets even in your mistakes.   If you barrel along not taking time to listen to others around you, or to your customers, you’ll wind up out of money and confused.

I’m very excited to announce that we’re now ranked #4 in Atlanta for interactive shops according to the Atlanta Business Chronicle! Last year we were tied for #16 so this is a huge jump for us. I want to thank all the amazing people at Spunlogic for all the great work that has allowed us grow the way we have.

Other notable Spunlogic #4’s:

The 4th company trip we took was a cruise to Cancun

(the gang on our 4th company trip, 2nd cruise)

The 4th office we had was in Colony Square in 2000
(1st was my dorm room, 2nd was my mom’s basement, 3rd was the back of a Fitness International)

(Colony Square office, our free cubes and Raj’s amazing art work…why isn’t he still our Creative Director???)

The 4th Fortune 500 company we landed was Coca-Cola

(RJ in Second Life w/ a Coke)

The 4th title that Raj has had is VP, Strategy

(a young Raj in the early years)

The 4th place choice for the new name of the agency back in 2001 (when we were NBN Designs) was Cracker Snap (1st was obviously Spunlogic, 2nd was Brain Stick, 3rd was Code Word Nine)

(our first logo)

On SMS Text News yesterday I saw a post about Pepsi’s new Bluetooth campaign run by Qwikker.   The concept is that several bus shelters and pay phones in Washington D.C., Los Angeles, Denver, Orange County, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia will give consumers with a Bluetooth device the ability to download free video clips.  It’s considered the largest Bluetooth marketing campaign to date.

Very cool and all the press I read about it agrees.  But I’m confused.  Having been talking about the power of virtual worlds for the better part of six months now, the main objection that marketers have is the reach (or the perceived lack thereof).  In Second Life in particular, with only 40,000 to 50,000 people “in-world” at any given time, it’s hard to get the reach that you would get from most other interactive marketing campaigns.

How is this Bluetooth campaign by Pepsi any different?  How many people can they really expect on a daily basis to a) stop at one of these few locations, b) have a Bluetooth device, c) know how to use it properly and d) want to download a Pepsi video?  And knowing there’s very little chance this campaign is less expensive or time consuming to create than a Second Life presence, I doubt the ROI is going to be any better.

And the second thing I hear most about Second Life’s downside is that you can’t really have more than 30 to 40 people in any given area without experiencing serious lag and decreased productivity.  Last time I checked, there weren’t a lot of phone booth’s that could hold that many people (though try as they may).

Am I missing something or should the same people that chastise Second Life also be chastising this Pepsi campaign?