Delta Air Lines recently announced that Jews and Israelis (or passengers carrying any non-Islamic article of faith) will not be able to fly code-share flights from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia under the airline's new partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines that is set to begin in 2012.
The bone-headed move is generating a firestorm of negative PR for Delta (which will probably force the airline to rescind the policy) and a stream of correspondence to the U.S. State Department from concerned citizens--regardless of religious affiliation.
I am opposed to the U.S. entering an "open skies" agreement with Saudi Arabia so long as that government maintains its policy of not allowing entry into Saudi Arabia of any American citizen who is either:
1) of the Jewish faith; or
2) has an Israeli exit or entrance stamp in his/her passport.
Saudi Arabia currently maintains both of these patently discriminatory prohibitions.
If Saudi Arabia or some other country had a visa policy that prohibited the entry of, say, Black American citizens, the State Department would never countenance entering a "open skies" agreement with a country that maintained such a patently discriminatory policy. Indeed, I would think the U.S. Government would not even allow the airline of that country to operate at all the United States, much less to do so with all the advantages of a "open skies" agreement.
Perhaps certain people in the U.S. State Department who administer such affairs believe that Jewish American citizens can be treated differently and that discrimination against them by a country like Saudi Arabia is acceptable merely because it is part of the Saudi "visa policy."
The U.S. State Department must act immediately to insist that Saudi Arabia abandon its two discriminatory prohibitions as a condition of enjoying all the advantages of a "open skies" agreement with the U.S. Now that the dispute has become public, it is up to Secretary Hillary Clinton to take the lead on pressuring Saudi Arabia to reverse these offensive discriminatory prohibitions.
In a statement to Religion News Service on Thursday (June 23), Delta said it "does not discriminate, nor do we condone discrimination against any protected class of passenger in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender."
Cowering behind the statement that it is adhering to the visa policies of Saudi Arabia, Delta's stance is hypocritical, feckless and indefensible. With the airline now publicly accused of implementing a "no-Jew fly policy", it's only a matter of time until the U.S. public forces the airline to do what the U.S. State Department should have done as soon as it learned of the proposed Sky Team Alliance agreement.
Showing posts with label Bruce R. Mendelsohn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bruce R. Mendelsohn. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Why Big Oil Will ALWAYS Lose the High Profits-High Gas Prices PR Battle
Pity poor Exxon, "demonized" in the media for earning a record of almost $11 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2011.
Pity Ken Cohen, Exxon's embattled Vice President of of Public and Government Affairs, whose pugnacious response sought to decouple Exxon's profit from increasing gas prices at the pump.
Pity them, because no matter how logical, reasonable or well-parsed Cohen's statement was, the American public will always equate rising fuel prices with higher profits for Big Oil.
From a public relations perspective, it's easy to understand why Cohen sought to explain how the two issues (Big Oil profits and high gas prices) are separate: By providing a coherent, rational explanation, he wanted to get ahead of the story.
The problem for Cohen--indeed, Big Oil overall--is that when gas hits $4 or $5 a gallon, the American public isn't coherent or rational. It's angry. And trying to defuse raw anger with rational thought is like trying to douse a fire with... gasoline. It makes it worse.
And this, friends, is precisely what Cohen's statement has done.
Here's what he said in the lengthy statement sent to reporters: "We understand that it's simply too irresistable for many politicians in times of high oil prices and high earnings-they feel they have to demonize our industry."
He lashed out at the task force recently created by the Obama administration to crack down on speculation in the oil market, adding the fact that federal and state taxes make up 40 to 60 cents of the price for a gallon of gas, versus the 7 cents per gallon that Exxon Mobil earns.
He further argued that most of Exxon's profit comes from its overseas operations, and that earnings in its refining business, which converts crude into oil and diesel, make up only 6% of its earnings.
What did the public hear? "We made $11 billion in profit this past quarter, and as gas prices continue to increase, we're going to make even more money next quarter."
Better he had endured the momentary media excoriation, saying nothing until tomorrow, when the media's (and the American public's) attention will be focused on the Royal Wedding.
Pity Ken Cohen, Exxon's embattled Vice President of of Public and Government Affairs, whose pugnacious response sought to decouple Exxon's profit from increasing gas prices at the pump.
Pity them, because no matter how logical, reasonable or well-parsed Cohen's statement was, the American public will always equate rising fuel prices with higher profits for Big Oil.
From a public relations perspective, it's easy to understand why Cohen sought to explain how the two issues (Big Oil profits and high gas prices) are separate: By providing a coherent, rational explanation, he wanted to get ahead of the story.
The problem for Cohen--indeed, Big Oil overall--is that when gas hits $4 or $5 a gallon, the American public isn't coherent or rational. It's angry. And trying to defuse raw anger with rational thought is like trying to douse a fire with... gasoline. It makes it worse.
And this, friends, is precisely what Cohen's statement has done.
Here's what he said in the lengthy statement sent to reporters: "We understand that it's simply too irresistable for many politicians in times of high oil prices and high earnings-they feel they have to demonize our industry."
He lashed out at the task force recently created by the Obama administration to crack down on speculation in the oil market, adding the fact that federal and state taxes make up 40 to 60 cents of the price for a gallon of gas, versus the 7 cents per gallon that Exxon Mobil earns.
He further argued that most of Exxon's profit comes from its overseas operations, and that earnings in its refining business, which converts crude into oil and diesel, make up only 6% of its earnings.
What did the public hear? "We made $11 billion in profit this past quarter, and as gas prices continue to increase, we're going to make even more money next quarter."
Better he had endured the momentary media excoriation, saying nothing until tomorrow, when the media's (and the American public's) attention will be focused on the Royal Wedding.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Attention! A Brief Post About a Little Blue Pill
Today in history marked a momentous step in male-female relations: In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved use of the little blue pill Viagra. As we all know by now, "Vitamin V" is a oral medication that treats impotence. Viagra took sex in a completely new... direction (I'll spare you the obvious applicable rhyming word for 'direction').
Anyway, Sildenafil (Viagra's chemical name) was originally synthesized and studied to treat high blood pressure. This little fact makes me wonder about the testing protocols scientists applied to the development of Sildenafil: I'd like to know exactly how chemists at Pfizer discovered that while Viagra had little effect on high blood pressure, it could induce penile erections.
Seeing the economic opportunity in the effect of Viagra, Pfizer elected (again dispensing with the obvious rhyme) to market the drug for impotence. Sildenafil was patented in 1996, and just two years later the FDA approved it for use in treating "erectile dysfunction," a fancy new clinical name for impotence.
The "little blue pill that could" was immediately successful: It flew off the shelves into the medicine cabinets of middle-aged men and of course the scripts of late night comics.
In just its first year, the $8-$10 pills yielded about a billion dollars in sales. Even the distinguished almost-octogenarian Senator Bob Dole marketed Viagra on TV, confessing to ED (one imagines, much to the chagrin of his long-suffering but suddenly happy spouse). This kind of direct-to-consumer marketing was new to the prescription drug industry and changed forever the sales and marketing of pharmaceuticals: Today, sales and marketing account for approximately 30% of the pharmaceutical industry's costs, in some cases more than research and development.
Viagra's success stimulated (come on, there's no other word for it) a wave of competitors (and equally embarrassing commercials for) Cialis (tadalafil) and Levitra (vardenafil).
As with many drugs, Viagra's long-term effects on men's health remain unclear ironically, Viagra warns those who suffer from heart trouble), but its popularity is unabated: The latest data says that more than 20 million Americans have tried it, a number which will no doubt get bigger (it's just too easy) as the baby boomer population ages... and they want to relive the Summer of Love (again and again and again).
Cheers, Little Blue Pill.
Anyway, Sildenafil (Viagra's chemical name) was originally synthesized and studied to treat high blood pressure. This little fact makes me wonder about the testing protocols scientists applied to the development of Sildenafil: I'd like to know exactly how chemists at Pfizer discovered that while Viagra had little effect on high blood pressure, it could induce penile erections.
Seeing the economic opportunity in the effect of Viagra, Pfizer elected (again dispensing with the obvious rhyme) to market the drug for impotence. Sildenafil was patented in 1996, and just two years later the FDA approved it for use in treating "erectile dysfunction," a fancy new clinical name for impotence.
The "little blue pill that could" was immediately successful: It flew off the shelves into the medicine cabinets of middle-aged men and of course the scripts of late night comics.
In just its first year, the $8-$10 pills yielded about a billion dollars in sales. Even the distinguished almost-octogenarian Senator Bob Dole marketed Viagra on TV, confessing to ED (one imagines, much to the chagrin of his long-suffering but suddenly happy spouse). This kind of direct-to-consumer marketing was new to the prescription drug industry and changed forever the sales and marketing of pharmaceuticals: Today, sales and marketing account for approximately 30% of the pharmaceutical industry's costs, in some cases more than research and development.
Viagra's success stimulated (come on, there's no other word for it) a wave of competitors (and equally embarrassing commercials for) Cialis (tadalafil) and Levitra (vardenafil).
As with many drugs, Viagra's long-term effects on men's health remain unclear ironically, Viagra warns those who suffer from heart trouble), but its popularity is unabated: The latest data says that more than 20 million Americans have tried it, a number which will no doubt get bigger (it's just too easy) as the baby boomer population ages... and they want to relive the Summer of Love (again and again and again).
Cheers, Little Blue Pill.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
The Definitive Post on Social Media: My Two Cents
Any conversation about marketing and communications strategy these days involves social media. This is as it should be; social media is an important component of any marketing (big M) and communications (capital C) strategy. In this blog post you'll discover why I (and many savvy marcomm pros) believe social media is way overhyped and overrated.
When you've finished reading this post, please add your comment.
This blog entry is inspired by a truly insightful article at TECHi.
To be done engagingly, effectively, and consistently, social media marketing must be a full-time job. Small business owners can't do it full time; they haven't the resources. The best they can do is hire someone, generally a self-described "Social Media Expert", who claims to know how to establish a small business' social media footprint but doesn't take the time to know the business. PR Agencies and Ad Agencies are falling over themselves to hire "social media managers", usually fresh-out-of-college graduates who've never planned or managed a comprehensive marketing communications strategy.
What small business owners need to do is FIRST, carefully consider their target audiences and available resources and SECOND, determine the social media platforms that give your business the most visibility. Don't rush to be on Facebook if you're not updating your status daily. Don't fly to Twitter if you're not Tweeting several times a day. Don't be on YouTube if you've got no compelling videos. Don't be on LinkedIn if you're not answering questions, participating in discussions, or completing your profile. Not all platforms are relevant or appropriate for every business.
Choose wisely, because if you seek to be everywhere in social media you'll get nowhere.
One social media approach doesn't fit all, and if some self-proclaimed expert suggests you need to be everywhere, she or he has just indicated to you their fundamental misunderstanding of the marketing and communications purpose of social media. It's one component of a carefully considered and thoughtfully implemented marketing and communications strategy: Not a panacea.
Small business owners, marketers, social media experts: What do you think?
When you've finished reading this post, please add your comment.
This blog entry is inspired by a truly insightful article at TECHi.
To be done engagingly, effectively, and consistently, social media marketing must be a full-time job. Small business owners can't do it full time; they haven't the resources. The best they can do is hire someone, generally a self-described "Social Media Expert", who claims to know how to establish a small business' social media footprint but doesn't take the time to know the business. PR Agencies and Ad Agencies are falling over themselves to hire "social media managers", usually fresh-out-of-college graduates who've never planned or managed a comprehensive marketing communications strategy.
What small business owners need to do is FIRST, carefully consider their target audiences and available resources and SECOND, determine the social media platforms that give your business the most visibility. Don't rush to be on Facebook if you're not updating your status daily. Don't fly to Twitter if you're not Tweeting several times a day. Don't be on YouTube if you've got no compelling videos. Don't be on LinkedIn if you're not answering questions, participating in discussions, or completing your profile. Not all platforms are relevant or appropriate for every business.
Choose wisely, because if you seek to be everywhere in social media you'll get nowhere.
One social media approach doesn't fit all, and if some self-proclaimed expert suggests you need to be everywhere, she or he has just indicated to you their fundamental misunderstanding of the marketing and communications purpose of social media. It's one component of a carefully considered and thoughtfully implemented marketing and communications strategy: Not a panacea.
Small business owners, marketers, social media experts: What do you think?
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
When Product Recalls Go Too Far... Or, "It's Someone Else's Fault I'm an Idiot"
I'm a big fan of the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). Its laudable charge: To protect the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from thousands of types of consumer products. At any one time, the CPSC's website posts bulletins of thousands of product recalls--product defects that can (and often do) injure or kill unsuspecting consumers.
The CPSC's work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the 30% decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.
Many of the product recall notifications get posted by companies with integrity (hard to believe in the face of such overwhelming evidence of avarice that such a characteristic still exists in corporate America).
I'll admit to trolling the product recall notifications to catch a company's poor product engineering, or worse, gross negligence. But today I came across a product recall that were the threat not so serious would have caused me to guffaw.
Here's the headline of the notification, friends: The Gerson Company Recalls Glass Vases Due to Laceration Hazard
As it turns out, unbelievably, the glass vases can shatter on impact, potentially causing lacerations to unsuspecting consumers who ostensibly try to clean up the shards. The recalled vases, MADE IN CHINA (another shocker) are made of clear glass and stand about 4" wide x 20" tall.
Imported by the Gerson Company, of Olathe, Kansas, the vases were sold for about $15 at Michael's stores in the U.S. and Canada from July 2006 through March 2010. Thus far, the Gerson Company has received nine reports of the vase shattering, including nine reports of lacerations to the hands.
The remedy suggested by the company and the CPSC: "Consumers should stop using the recalled vase and discard them immediately."
So let me get this straight: Glass vase shatters on impact with hard object (presumably the floor or ground). Consumer tries to pick up glass shards. Hands get lacerated. Consumer calls company to complain. Company urges consumers to discard the vase immediately (presumably in the trash, where it can shatter and likely lead to further lacerations).
It seems to me that consumers bear some responsibility for getting their hands lacerated when they pick up shattered glass. Or have we reached the laughable point in our society at which someone other than us is culpable for any misfortune that befalls us?
The CPSC's work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the 30% decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.
Many of the product recall notifications get posted by companies with integrity (hard to believe in the face of such overwhelming evidence of avarice that such a characteristic still exists in corporate America).
I'll admit to trolling the product recall notifications to catch a company's poor product engineering, or worse, gross negligence. But today I came across a product recall that were the threat not so serious would have caused me to guffaw.
Here's the headline of the notification, friends: The Gerson Company Recalls Glass Vases Due to Laceration Hazard
As it turns out, unbelievably, the glass vases can shatter on impact, potentially causing lacerations to unsuspecting consumers who ostensibly try to clean up the shards. The recalled vases, MADE IN CHINA (another shocker) are made of clear glass and stand about 4" wide x 20" tall.
Imported by the Gerson Company, of Olathe, Kansas, the vases were sold for about $15 at Michael's stores in the U.S. and Canada from July 2006 through March 2010. Thus far, the Gerson Company has received nine reports of the vase shattering, including nine reports of lacerations to the hands.
The remedy suggested by the company and the CPSC: "Consumers should stop using the recalled vase and discard them immediately."
So let me get this straight: Glass vase shatters on impact with hard object (presumably the floor or ground). Consumer tries to pick up glass shards. Hands get lacerated. Consumer calls company to complain. Company urges consumers to discard the vase immediately (presumably in the trash, where it can shatter and likely lead to further lacerations).
It seems to me that consumers bear some responsibility for getting their hands lacerated when they pick up shattered glass. Or have we reached the laughable point in our society at which someone other than us is culpable for any misfortune that befalls us?
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Simple Public Relations Advice You Can Easily Implement in Crisis Situations
In the past three months we have witnessed two massive, highly visible and uncomfortably humiliating public relations blunders: The first one, most obvious and exhaustingly covered by the media, involves Championship-Golfer-Professional-Philanderer Tiger Woods; the second, less obvious but significantly more alarming, involves the flip-flopping by Janet Napolitano on the effectiveness of our nation's airline security measures. While the former is entertaining in a lascivious manner, the latter is life threatening.
Both issues underscore the importance of having a clear and universally understood (at least within the organization) PR plan in place to deal with any crisis. Such a plan is based, simply, on telling the truth early and often.
As these two events have ruthlessly revealed, it's absolutely essential for highly visible public personalities to employ smart, experienced, and professional public relations experts and to let them work. The results of not doing so are embarrassingly public.
Let's address Tiger's situation first. We all know how this tragi-comedy has evolved. But let's go back to the uncertainty surrounding the confusing moments when this story broke. If Tiger himself had simply released a statement to the media (NOT via his website, but through a publicist) that he and Elin had had a domestic dispute and, in his haste to leave the house for "some air", he accidentally backed his Escalade into a tree, the entire story would most likely have had a sympathetic angle for Tiger. We all know how stressful the holidays can be; after all, hasn't each of us fought with family before, during or after Thanksgiving?
A strong, honest and direct statement immediately after the event would have placed Tiger and his team ahead of the story. Once the 24-7-365 media got the smell of blood in the water, the sharks began to tear apart the story and we all know the carnage that ensued. Still, one wonders what the outcome might have been had Tiger and his team told a simple, honest story with which the American public can identify. That would have at least established some sympathy for Tiger.
Before we examine in some depth Janet Napolitano's "the-system-worked-the-system-failed" flip-flopping, let's look at one of the consequences of her confusing media statements. Initially, President Obama (as is his modus operandi) allowed Napolitano to be the administration's lead spokesperson on the terrorist incident aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. That is, until Napolitano's statements revealed a inexcusable lack of clarity and reflected poorly on the administration's anti-terror stance--especially at a time of year when airline passenger traffic is especially high. Napolitano's confusing public statements (she obviously was not well coached on the appropriate messaging for this situation) forced President Obama to intercede.
Janet Napolitano made her boss look bad. As a PR pro, my job is to make my boss look good. I get him fully briefed and properly coached. I make sure he knows the facts and delivers them calmly. If "mistakes are made", I own them. Not my boss.
While President Obama didn't publicly rebuke Napolitano (as Chris Good clearly explains in his blog at The Atlantic, privately you can bet that he strongly encouraged her to henceforth leave the public statements to him. Need proof? What have you heard from her since the President's very strong and compelling statement a few days ago?
In contrast to Janet Napolitano's confusing statements about which aspect of the system did or did not work, the Obama White House has been aggressive in its press outreach regarding the Northwest Airlines terrorist incident.
The American public doesn't understand that one part of TSA's security measures worked and one didn't. You needn't be a PR pro to understand that the American public doesn't tolerate that kind of wordsmithing. As a PR pro, though, I know the news media doesn't have the time or patience to explain it. All the flying public knows is that a terrorist almost blew up a plane; it was only because the device failed that the plane and its passengers landed safely. A savvy PR professional would have understood that and coached Janet Napolitano on the appropriate media messaging to reassure our flying public.
Skilled Public Relations professionals understand that the best stance to take with the media and our news-saturated citizenry is to tell the truth, tell it early, and tell it often.
Both issues underscore the importance of having a clear and universally understood (at least within the organization) PR plan in place to deal with any crisis. Such a plan is based, simply, on telling the truth early and often.
As these two events have ruthlessly revealed, it's absolutely essential for highly visible public personalities to employ smart, experienced, and professional public relations experts and to let them work. The results of not doing so are embarrassingly public.
Let's address Tiger's situation first. We all know how this tragi-comedy has evolved. But let's go back to the uncertainty surrounding the confusing moments when this story broke. If Tiger himself had simply released a statement to the media (NOT via his website, but through a publicist) that he and Elin had had a domestic dispute and, in his haste to leave the house for "some air", he accidentally backed his Escalade into a tree, the entire story would most likely have had a sympathetic angle for Tiger. We all know how stressful the holidays can be; after all, hasn't each of us fought with family before, during or after Thanksgiving?
A strong, honest and direct statement immediately after the event would have placed Tiger and his team ahead of the story. Once the 24-7-365 media got the smell of blood in the water, the sharks began to tear apart the story and we all know the carnage that ensued. Still, one wonders what the outcome might have been had Tiger and his team told a simple, honest story with which the American public can identify. That would have at least established some sympathy for Tiger.
Before we examine in some depth Janet Napolitano's "the-system-worked-the-system-failed" flip-flopping, let's look at one of the consequences of her confusing media statements. Initially, President Obama (as is his modus operandi) allowed Napolitano to be the administration's lead spokesperson on the terrorist incident aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. That is, until Napolitano's statements revealed a inexcusable lack of clarity and reflected poorly on the administration's anti-terror stance--especially at a time of year when airline passenger traffic is especially high. Napolitano's confusing public statements (she obviously was not well coached on the appropriate messaging for this situation) forced President Obama to intercede.
Janet Napolitano made her boss look bad. As a PR pro, my job is to make my boss look good. I get him fully briefed and properly coached. I make sure he knows the facts and delivers them calmly. If "mistakes are made", I own them. Not my boss.
While President Obama didn't publicly rebuke Napolitano (as Chris Good clearly explains in his blog at The Atlantic, privately you can bet that he strongly encouraged her to henceforth leave the public statements to him. Need proof? What have you heard from her since the President's very strong and compelling statement a few days ago?
In contrast to Janet Napolitano's confusing statements about which aspect of the system did or did not work, the Obama White House has been aggressive in its press outreach regarding the Northwest Airlines terrorist incident.
The American public doesn't understand that one part of TSA's security measures worked and one didn't. You needn't be a PR pro to understand that the American public doesn't tolerate that kind of wordsmithing. As a PR pro, though, I know the news media doesn't have the time or patience to explain it. All the flying public knows is that a terrorist almost blew up a plane; it was only because the device failed that the plane and its passengers landed safely. A savvy PR professional would have understood that and coached Janet Napolitano on the appropriate media messaging to reassure our flying public.
Skilled Public Relations professionals understand that the best stance to take with the media and our news-saturated citizenry is to tell the truth, tell it early, and tell it often.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Developing MIT Undergraduate Engineers into Leaders: Watch the Video!
As Director of Communications and Outreach for the Bernard M. Gordon-MIT Engineering Leadership Program, I've learned over the past 16 months that engineers--like most other professionals--take very seriously the future robustness of their profession. This is particularly germane as the older generation of engineers retires, revealing gaping holes in the knowledge, proficiency and leadership skills of those engineers who would replace them.
I've been told by lifelong engineers that the Gordon-MIT ELP is a truly new approach to teaching leadership to a new generation of engineers, and this video demonstrates how we're doing it.
I love the program because it really looks at how people lead and--similar to my participation many years ago in ROTC and experiences as a young Army officer--the program devises unique ways to help young engineers learn those skills. It's open to all undergraduates in MIT's School of Engineering - that's almost 1000 new students each year.
One part of the program is an "Industry Advisory Board" (IAB). Among the IAB members are Bill Warner of Avid (an Oscar winner who produced this video, and whose energy, creativity and expertise has helped advance the program in many ways), Vanu Bose, of Vanu, Inc, Dan Riccio of Apple Computer, Inc., Sorin Marcovici of Analogic, Victor Tang of IBM, Peter Zeeb of GeoSyntec, Javier de Luis of Aurora Flight Systems, Jean-Marc Soucy of BP, and of course Bernie Gordon, Founder of Analogic.
In my experience, outside boards like the IAB are often lightly involved: Brief'em, feed'em, get'em out the door. Not in the Gordon-MIT ELP: The IAB played an instrumental role in designing the goals, the methods, and even the philosophy of the program. Bernie Gordon actively participates in IAB meetings. The result is productive collaboration of engineering leaders from industry and from MIT. The IAB is heavily involved, and the program benefits at all levels from their active participation.
For students in the program, It's not the usual classroom routine: MIT sophomores enter the Gordon-MIT ELP through MIT's popular UPOP (Undergraduate Practice Opportunities Program); after successfully completing UPOP they are eligible to participate in ELPOP (Engineering Leadership Practice Opportunities Program), which offers certain aspects of the Gordon program, but is less intensive.
The program's most intense level of participation is the highly selective GEL (Gordon Engineering Leader) track, which includes weekly Engineering Leadership Labs (ELL--see below); "Internship Plus" opportunities where students get jobs in industry over the summer and obtain meaningful leadership exposure; short courses in "Engineering Innovation and Design," "Engineering Leadership," and others; close mentorship relationships with industry leaders; one-on-one leadership counseling and development, and much more. Both ELPOP and GEL immerse students in leadership training for two years.
A core component of the GEL program are the weekly ELLs. Each lab teaches some element of leadership. Labs are designed by seniors in the program, and are delivered to juniors. It's a great way to delve into leadership - through high-pressure exercises, and later by designing and teaching those exercises. You'll see one example of a recent ELL in the video.
From a personal standpoint, being so closely involved with the design and evolution of the program has really given me a feel for what the program makes possible. I've seen our students evolve as leaders from week to week. I've seen them open their eyes to new ways to getting things done -- sometimes by taking the fastest path, not the hardest or most complex (as MIT students are reputed for doing). I've seen them learn from the staff and from each other. I've seen them understand why basic communications and interpersonal skills are essential, and put their new-found skills to use leading others.
Leadership isn't taught; it's learned. And what better place than MIT for our nation's future engineering leaders to learn the leadership skills that will help to advance engineering innovation and invention.
I've been told by lifelong engineers that the Gordon-MIT ELP is a truly new approach to teaching leadership to a new generation of engineers, and this video demonstrates how we're doing it.
I love the program because it really looks at how people lead and--similar to my participation many years ago in ROTC and experiences as a young Army officer--the program devises unique ways to help young engineers learn those skills. It's open to all undergraduates in MIT's School of Engineering - that's almost 1000 new students each year.
One part of the program is an "Industry Advisory Board" (IAB). Among the IAB members are Bill Warner of Avid (an Oscar winner who produced this video, and whose energy, creativity and expertise has helped advance the program in many ways), Vanu Bose, of Vanu, Inc, Dan Riccio of Apple Computer, Inc., Sorin Marcovici of Analogic, Victor Tang of IBM, Peter Zeeb of GeoSyntec, Javier de Luis of Aurora Flight Systems, Jean-Marc Soucy of BP, and of course Bernie Gordon, Founder of Analogic.
In my experience, outside boards like the IAB are often lightly involved: Brief'em, feed'em, get'em out the door. Not in the Gordon-MIT ELP: The IAB played an instrumental role in designing the goals, the methods, and even the philosophy of the program. Bernie Gordon actively participates in IAB meetings. The result is productive collaboration of engineering leaders from industry and from MIT. The IAB is heavily involved, and the program benefits at all levels from their active participation.
For students in the program, It's not the usual classroom routine: MIT sophomores enter the Gordon-MIT ELP through MIT's popular UPOP (Undergraduate Practice Opportunities Program); after successfully completing UPOP they are eligible to participate in ELPOP (Engineering Leadership Practice Opportunities Program), which offers certain aspects of the Gordon program, but is less intensive.
The program's most intense level of participation is the highly selective GEL (Gordon Engineering Leader) track, which includes weekly Engineering Leadership Labs (ELL--see below); "Internship Plus" opportunities where students get jobs in industry over the summer and obtain meaningful leadership exposure; short courses in "Engineering Innovation and Design," "Engineering Leadership," and others; close mentorship relationships with industry leaders; one-on-one leadership counseling and development, and much more. Both ELPOP and GEL immerse students in leadership training for two years.
A core component of the GEL program are the weekly ELLs. Each lab teaches some element of leadership. Labs are designed by seniors in the program, and are delivered to juniors. It's a great way to delve into leadership - through high-pressure exercises, and later by designing and teaching those exercises. You'll see one example of a recent ELL in the video.
From a personal standpoint, being so closely involved with the design and evolution of the program has really given me a feel for what the program makes possible. I've seen our students evolve as leaders from week to week. I've seen them open their eyes to new ways to getting things done -- sometimes by taking the fastest path, not the hardest or most complex (as MIT students are reputed for doing). I've seen them learn from the staff and from each other. I've seen them understand why basic communications and interpersonal skills are essential, and put their new-found skills to use leading others.
Leadership isn't taught; it's learned. And what better place than MIT for our nation's future engineering leaders to learn the leadership skills that will help to advance engineering innovation and invention.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Three Easy and Affordable Ways to Position Your Marketing and Communications for 2009
The turning calendar year inevitably brings with it a tidal wave of retrospectives, guides, and lists about how you can do better—or differently—in the coming year. Every source purports to be expert; every “how-to” article authoritative.
Well, friends, as you’ve read in my blog, that ain’t me. I don’t pretend that what you’re about to read is the authoritative article on how to plan your marketing and communications efforts so they’ll generate measurable and quantifiable results in 2009. You can get that guesswork elsewhere; I won’t waste your precious time with it here.
What you will get are three simple ways to position your marketing and communications efforts to meet—and hopefully overcome—the challenges of 2009. Taking these three steps won’t cost a lot of money, either: Odds are some whiz-kid on your staff knows all about website coding and social networking; he or she will embrace the opportunity to implement some of “your” ideas.
Start with the assumption that the first six months of the year will remain economically moribund. We’re looking at a U-shaped bottom; the economy should start to rebound in the third quarter. Consumers will probably not regain much confidence until late in the fourth quarter—hopefully around the time the holiday spending binge kicks in.
So what do you need to do in the first 6-9 months of 2009 to prepare marketing and communications strategies and tactics that match the economy’s projected path?
Here are three simple and cost-conscious steps you can take now—-and build on in the coming months—-to position your marketing and communications for 2009:
1) PASS your web-based communications:
According to a new survey from Larstan Business Reports, the online communications market is growing at nearly 100% a year. Your web-based communications plays an increasingly critical role in marketing, communications and especially in sales.
Your website is your public face; it’s the first place potential customers interact with you and your product. Of course you know the KISS method; when it comes to websites, I advise my clients to use what I call the PASS method:
• Perfection is your goal: Make sure your content is perfectly aligned with your messaging. Use short sentences and clear, compelling grammar. Make it easy to navigate. Make key information easily accessible (no more than two clicks drilling down). Eliminate spelling errors. Feature concise calls to action.
• Analytics, Adhesivity, Accuracy, Attractiveness: Use Google Analytics (it’s free!) to track traffic to each page of your site. Determine what’s popular and what isn’t. Keep the popular and fix (or jettison) the unpopular. Focus not on website hits but unique visitors and time on site. Check your competitors’ numbers at sites like Compete.com, Quantcast.com, or Popuri.us. Make your site adhesive, accurate and attractive.
• Simplicity is king: The more complex your site, the harder to convey your unique sales proposition. Look at your site critically: Do you have too many pages for the message(s) you’re trying to convey? If so, downsize your website. After all, you don’t spend time clicking through your favorite sites—why should you require your customers to?!
• Separate your site from your competition: Yes, I know, you’re doing this already. Your content is better, your navigability simpler, your product better, blah blah blah. Well, how about doing a low- or no-cost thing like putting your company logo in the web browser’s URL window box? Or featuring your logo on every page, rather than just the home page? Leverage every opportunity to separate and distinguish your company and your product from your competition.
2) Social networking:
This one’s easy, cheap and highly effective. Remember, it doesn’t matter how great you say you are; far more meaningful are comments from others about how great you are.
Use Flickr to post photos of your customers interacting with your product; of your staff at work; etc. Use Facebook, MySpace, or Bebo to create an interest group around your product or company. Use LinkedIn to generate professional interest in your company or product. Expand your personal and professional network through Plaxo, Naymz, Brightfuse, or others. Generate content exclusively for your “friends” and “groupies”. Use social networking sites to generate loyalty and business.
3) Customer contact:
In challenging times, surveys show that nothing is more important than empathy and the quality of your communications efforts to build trust and long-term loyalty between your business and your customers. Here are just two of many suggestions to increase your contact with customers.
• Make your newsletter shorter and send it more often—at least twice a month. Fill it with discounts for loyal customers—make these soft sell offers to reflect your empathy for the tough economic times. Every issue, feature a photo and Q&A with a loyal customer; repurpose that content for your website, Facebook site, LinkedIn group, etc. If your customer has a Facebook site, post the feature on his or her wall. Show your customers you care.
• Advertise carefully: Revisit your advertising plan. You don’t need a full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal (Bob Nardelli and Chrysler, note!) to underscore your company’s value. Advertising in niche publications is cheaper and more effective—plus more likely to reach your target audience. Online, invest in a long-term Google Adwords campaign.
Do these three things right, integrate them, and your marketing and communications efforts can generate positive results as we navigate next year’s uncharted and murky water.
Well, friends, as you’ve read in my blog, that ain’t me. I don’t pretend that what you’re about to read is the authoritative article on how to plan your marketing and communications efforts so they’ll generate measurable and quantifiable results in 2009. You can get that guesswork elsewhere; I won’t waste your precious time with it here.
What you will get are three simple ways to position your marketing and communications efforts to meet—and hopefully overcome—the challenges of 2009. Taking these three steps won’t cost a lot of money, either: Odds are some whiz-kid on your staff knows all about website coding and social networking; he or she will embrace the opportunity to implement some of “your” ideas.
Start with the assumption that the first six months of the year will remain economically moribund. We’re looking at a U-shaped bottom; the economy should start to rebound in the third quarter. Consumers will probably not regain much confidence until late in the fourth quarter—hopefully around the time the holiday spending binge kicks in.
So what do you need to do in the first 6-9 months of 2009 to prepare marketing and communications strategies and tactics that match the economy’s projected path?
Here are three simple and cost-conscious steps you can take now—-and build on in the coming months—-to position your marketing and communications for 2009:
1) PASS your web-based communications:
According to a new survey from Larstan Business Reports, the online communications market is growing at nearly 100% a year. Your web-based communications plays an increasingly critical role in marketing, communications and especially in sales.
Your website is your public face; it’s the first place potential customers interact with you and your product. Of course you know the KISS method; when it comes to websites, I advise my clients to use what I call the PASS method:
• Perfection is your goal: Make sure your content is perfectly aligned with your messaging. Use short sentences and clear, compelling grammar. Make it easy to navigate. Make key information easily accessible (no more than two clicks drilling down). Eliminate spelling errors. Feature concise calls to action.
• Analytics, Adhesivity, Accuracy, Attractiveness: Use Google Analytics (it’s free!) to track traffic to each page of your site. Determine what’s popular and what isn’t. Keep the popular and fix (or jettison) the unpopular. Focus not on website hits but unique visitors and time on site. Check your competitors’ numbers at sites like Compete.com, Quantcast.com, or Popuri.us. Make your site adhesive, accurate and attractive.
• Simplicity is king: The more complex your site, the harder to convey your unique sales proposition. Look at your site critically: Do you have too many pages for the message(s) you’re trying to convey? If so, downsize your website. After all, you don’t spend time clicking through your favorite sites—why should you require your customers to?!
• Separate your site from your competition: Yes, I know, you’re doing this already. Your content is better, your navigability simpler, your product better, blah blah blah. Well, how about doing a low- or no-cost thing like putting your company logo in the web browser’s URL window box? Or featuring your logo on every page, rather than just the home page? Leverage every opportunity to separate and distinguish your company and your product from your competition.
2) Social networking:
This one’s easy, cheap and highly effective. Remember, it doesn’t matter how great you say you are; far more meaningful are comments from others about how great you are.
Use Flickr to post photos of your customers interacting with your product; of your staff at work; etc. Use Facebook, MySpace, or Bebo to create an interest group around your product or company. Use LinkedIn to generate professional interest in your company or product. Expand your personal and professional network through Plaxo, Naymz, Brightfuse, or others. Generate content exclusively for your “friends” and “groupies”. Use social networking sites to generate loyalty and business.
3) Customer contact:
In challenging times, surveys show that nothing is more important than empathy and the quality of your communications efforts to build trust and long-term loyalty between your business and your customers. Here are just two of many suggestions to increase your contact with customers.
• Make your newsletter shorter and send it more often—at least twice a month. Fill it with discounts for loyal customers—make these soft sell offers to reflect your empathy for the tough economic times. Every issue, feature a photo and Q&A with a loyal customer; repurpose that content for your website, Facebook site, LinkedIn group, etc. If your customer has a Facebook site, post the feature on his or her wall. Show your customers you care.
• Advertise carefully: Revisit your advertising plan. You don’t need a full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal (Bob Nardelli and Chrysler, note!) to underscore your company’s value. Advertising in niche publications is cheaper and more effective—plus more likely to reach your target audience. Online, invest in a long-term Google Adwords campaign.
Do these three things right, integrate them, and your marketing and communications efforts can generate positive results as we navigate next year’s uncharted and murky water.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
On this Earth Day, Here is an post regarding "Green Marketing"
Green Marketing: What it is and how to do it.
By Laura Briere & Bruce Mendelsohn
Consumers expect to double their spending on green products and services in the next year, totaling an estimated $500 billion annually or $43 billion per month, according to new findings from the 2007 ImagePower Green Brands Survey, conducted by WPP’s Landor Associates, Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates and Cohn & Wolfe.
The survey also found that consumer perceptions of green continue to change according to various collective definitions and contribute directly to buying decisions.
Green marketing is the responsible way to market your products/services by using technology, conservation and minimizing waste. If you haven’t started green marketing, the information below will help you on your way.
Going green, after all, is just a matter of changing your perception from focusing only on “tried and true” to the creative “let’s try something different.” What used to work still can, but the modern green revolution has opened up a whole new realm of opportunity for new marketing.
Some examples of great new technologies include blogs, social networking, e-newsletters, and online advertising. These complement the “tried and true” methods of public relations, cause marketing, viral marketing, and other activities that leverage the power of the media, word of mouth marketing and human interest.
The easiest way to get started with green marketing is to take a step back from your business and perform a brief green marketing audit. You should already have many of the answers, but it’s in your best interest to ask yourself again and step outside of your comfort zone. You may find it beneficial to consult a qualified marketing professional who can help expose you to a whole new world of green marketing options.
Create your green marketing plan:
By Laura Briere & Bruce Mendelsohn
Consumers expect to double their spending on green products and services in the next year, totaling an estimated $500 billion annually or $43 billion per month, according to new findings from the 2007 ImagePower Green Brands Survey, conducted by WPP’s Landor Associates, Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates and Cohn & Wolfe.
The survey also found that consumer perceptions of green continue to change according to various collective definitions and contribute directly to buying decisions.
Green marketing is the responsible way to market your products/services by using technology, conservation and minimizing waste. If you haven’t started green marketing, the information below will help you on your way.
Going green, after all, is just a matter of changing your perception from focusing only on “tried and true” to the creative “let’s try something different.” What used to work still can, but the modern green revolution has opened up a whole new realm of opportunity for new marketing.
Some examples of great new technologies include blogs, social networking, e-newsletters, and online advertising. These complement the “tried and true” methods of public relations, cause marketing, viral marketing, and other activities that leverage the power of the media, word of mouth marketing and human interest.
The easiest way to get started with green marketing is to take a step back from your business and perform a brief green marketing audit. You should already have many of the answers, but it’s in your best interest to ask yourself again and step outside of your comfort zone. You may find it beneficial to consult a qualified marketing professional who can help expose you to a whole new world of green marketing options.
Create your green marketing plan:
- Perform a market analysis and establish your “ground.”
- Where is your company in the market?
- What is your competition doing?
- Segment your business offerings by “who buys what.”
- What do your customers have in common?
- Are you offering too much?
- Are you trying to be everything to everyone?
- Determine your product/service market.
- Is it priced appropriately?
- Does it cost enough? Too much?
- Identify your core “green” messages.
- What green messages are you trying to convey to your customers?
- What is the basic POINT behind your messages? (Note: These are NOT your taglines
Outline what your core green “brand elements” should be/are.
- What does green marketing specifically look like as applied to your company?
- How do you want your customers to perceive your green marketing initiatives?
- Determine if your web site is in line with your marketing objectives and target markets.
- Is it up to date?
- Does it offer the latest technologies?
- Can you manage it yourself?
- Is it up to the highest standards in technology?
- Can you leverage the latest and greatest tools in new media?
- What can you change?
- Align your “green marketing plan” with your overall marketing objectives and target markets.
- Where possible, use metrics to align the two plans.
- Does your green marketing plan take advantage of the latest technologies?
- Can you manage it yourself?
- Determine the promotional areas in which you can get really creative/green.
- Can you leverage your commitment to green to help you spread your message?
- Which segments are going to care about your green marketing efforts?
- How much money can you save?
- How much money can you reallocate from previous methods to green and new freed-up opportunities?
Plan for feedback.
- How do you plan to get it?
- What will you do with it once you get it?
With so much focus on green marketing, many companies try to hop on the bandwagon by launching green initiatives that are in essence “greenwashing” or “green sheen.” These terms are generally used when companies spend significantly more money or time advertising being green (that is, operating with consideration for the environment), rather than investing resources on genuinely environmentally sound practices.
Consumers are increasingly knowledgeable of the difference between “real green” and “green sheen”; companies that invest resources in the latter risk significant negative PR when their greenwashing efforts are exposed.
In December 2007, environmental marketing company TerraChoice gained national press coverage for releasing a study called “The Six Sins of Greenwashing,” which found that 99% of 1,018 common consumer products randomly surveyed for the study were guilty of greenwashing. According to the study, the six sins of greenwashing are:
- Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off: e.g. “Energy-efficient” electronics that contain hazardous materials. 998 products and 57% of all environmental claims committed this Sin.
- Sin of No Proof: e.g. Shampoos claiming to be “certified organic,” but with no verifiable certification. 454 products and 26% of environmental claims committed this Sin.
- Sin of Vagueness: e.g. Products claiming to be 100% natural when many naturally-occurring substances are hazardous, like arsenic and formaldehyde (see appeal to nature). Seen in 196 products or 11% of environmental claims.
- Sin of Irrelevance: e.g. Products claiming to be CFC-free, even though CFCs were banned 20 years ago. This Sin was seen in 78 products and 4% of environmental claims.
- Sin of Fibbing: e.g. Products falsely claiming to be certified by an internationally recognized environmental standard like EcoLogo, Energy Star or Green Seal. Found in 10 products or less than 1% of environmental claims.
- Sin of Lesser of Two Evils: e.g. Organic cigarettes or “environmentally friendly” pesticides, This occurred in 17 products or 1% of environmental claim
Laura Briere is CEO & Founder of Vision Advertising, a marketing communications firm based in Worcester, MA. She is also head of the World Green Business Association.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Who Are the People In Your Neighborhood?
As a child, I recall listening to Mr. Rogers sing, "Who are the people in your neighborhood, the people that you meet each day?" (forgive me for forgetting the song verbatim and for paraphrasing it).
That song is particularly relevant these days, as the growth of online communities and the constant relocation of people redefines the concept of neighborhoods.
With online communities, the people in your neighborhood could be scattered throughout the world, giving most people a stronger virtual neighborhood than the actual physical neighborhood in which they live.
That's why when they interview people who live right next door to a troubled family, a serial killer, or some other notorious character, the interviewee generally says something like: "He was very quiet..." "They pretty much kept to themselves..." "We didn't often see them..." Or similar statements indicating that they really didn't know the people in their neighborhood.
The same thing applies within our professional lives. Speaking for my extroverted self, I want to know the people in my professional neighborhood: I want to discover what motivates them, what frustrates them, their strengths, their weaknesses, their expectations, and--as the relationship permits--details of their personal lives.
I believe this information forms a comprehensive picture of the people in my neighborhood, so from that perspective, I guess my motives are selfish. But back in the day, when we didn't have online communities and we knew--I mean, really knew--our neighbors--the type of people they were mattered far more than what they did, or with whom they could connect us.
If we got along with our neighbors, we relied on them and they relied on us. In times of need, we helped each other. In times of plenty we shared--not everything, but just enough to cement those ties.
As for me, I'm getting to know the people in my neighborhood: Those with whom I am linked by bits and bytes, those with whom I share physical space, and those with whom I am connected professionally. I want them to know that they're important to me in the way that Mr. Rogers sang about.
That song is particularly relevant these days, as the growth of online communities and the constant relocation of people redefines the concept of neighborhoods.
With online communities, the people in your neighborhood could be scattered throughout the world, giving most people a stronger virtual neighborhood than the actual physical neighborhood in which they live.
That's why when they interview people who live right next door to a troubled family, a serial killer, or some other notorious character, the interviewee generally says something like: "He was very quiet..." "They pretty much kept to themselves..." "We didn't often see them..." Or similar statements indicating that they really didn't know the people in their neighborhood.
The same thing applies within our professional lives. Speaking for my extroverted self, I want to know the people in my professional neighborhood: I want to discover what motivates them, what frustrates them, their strengths, their weaknesses, their expectations, and--as the relationship permits--details of their personal lives.
I believe this information forms a comprehensive picture of the people in my neighborhood, so from that perspective, I guess my motives are selfish. But back in the day, when we didn't have online communities and we knew--I mean, really knew--our neighbors--the type of people they were mattered far more than what they did, or with whom they could connect us.
If we got along with our neighbors, we relied on them and they relied on us. In times of need, we helped each other. In times of plenty we shared--not everything, but just enough to cement those ties.
As for me, I'm getting to know the people in my neighborhood: Those with whom I am linked by bits and bytes, those with whom I share physical space, and those with whom I am connected professionally. I want them to know that they're important to me in the way that Mr. Rogers sang about.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Integrity: The Key Ingredient in Mutually Beneficial Business Relationships
I recently had a conference call with some clients from out of state. I know these clients personally first, and then professionally; so we initially spent some time catching up on personal issues. After our discussion had run through the obligatory: Sports, mutual friends, vacation plans, we then moved on to more personal matters. (For men there are varying degrees of personal matters: Those you share with acquaintances, those you share with colleagues, and those you share with true friends).
I asked one of my clients--an entrepreneur for whom I sometimes craft articles and promotional materials--how things were going with his business. He's carved out a rather unique niche in his business: He identifies ways companies can reduce what they spend on various services (utilities, phone, printers, etc.) and earns a percentage of the ensuing savings for his shrewd analysis.
A typical entrepreneur, my friend is big picture all the way: He thinks big, plans big, and rarely sees the details. He's a great salesman and has over the past few years, based on the growth of his business, surrounded himself with people who can help him continue that growth in a planned, strategic fashion.
Recently, one of the people he hired did not deliver. Without getting into specifics, because this guy failed to produce a business development plan, my friend lost a connection to a venture capitalist who was interested in taking a seven-figure stake in the growth of his business.
Which brings me to today's topic: Integrity.
Wikipedia has an interesting commentary on the topic, suggesting that we can identify the value and importance of integrity by comparing two scenarios: On the one hand, a world of honesty and sincerity, of being able to rely on what others say. A world in which people are punctual and willingly fulfill their obligations and duties in life and to the best of their ability. This would be a world without lying, cheating, stealing, fraud, criminality, etc. Clearly, an ideal world.
In our business relationships, and more importantly in our personal relationships, our word is our bond. If you commit to doing something, do it. If you make a promise, you follow through. You don't accept payment for services you don't provide. You don't overcharge. You don't lie. You lead a life--personal and professional--of integrity.
You may not make a fortune leading such a life, but you can honestly say to yourself and to others that you have integrity.
I asked one of my clients--an entrepreneur for whom I sometimes craft articles and promotional materials--how things were going with his business. He's carved out a rather unique niche in his business: He identifies ways companies can reduce what they spend on various services (utilities, phone, printers, etc.) and earns a percentage of the ensuing savings for his shrewd analysis.
A typical entrepreneur, my friend is big picture all the way: He thinks big, plans big, and rarely sees the details. He's a great salesman and has over the past few years, based on the growth of his business, surrounded himself with people who can help him continue that growth in a planned, strategic fashion.
Recently, one of the people he hired did not deliver. Without getting into specifics, because this guy failed to produce a business development plan, my friend lost a connection to a venture capitalist who was interested in taking a seven-figure stake in the growth of his business.
Which brings me to today's topic: Integrity.
Wikipedia has an interesting commentary on the topic, suggesting that we can identify the value and importance of integrity by comparing two scenarios: On the one hand, a world of honesty and sincerity, of being able to rely on what others say. A world in which people are punctual and willingly fulfill their obligations and duties in life and to the best of their ability. This would be a world without lying, cheating, stealing, fraud, criminality, etc. Clearly, an ideal world.
On the other hand, imagine a world in which everybody is dishonest most of the time: Nobody tells the truth if it is not in their best interest, everybody is out to get everything they can, any way they can, including by lying and not keeping agreements and contracts. People shirk duties, obligations, and only when forced pay debts. When the opportunity presents itself, people will commit fraud and steal.
Our second imagined world is going to be full of rules and laws, long contracts, lawsuits, police, judges, and punishments to control non-integral behavior. One of the main purposes of law is to enforce integrity when the people have none. In a society rife with laws, as ours is, do we in fact lack integrity?
On the personal level, a lack of integrity is detrimental to one's personal power in life, to the respect of and relationships with others; above all, a lack of integrity destroys one's self-respect and self-esteem --qualities absolutely essential for personal happiness.
Wikipedia suggests that there are two ways to accumulate great power and wealth in life: One is by the path of love and integrity, creating great Good for others (good products and services). The other is by the path of Anti-Love and No-Integrity... Lying, cheating, stealing, criminality.
The difference between the two is happiness. The cost of the path of No-Integrity is without exception personal unhappiness.
Without getting into details, the guy whom my friend hired was paid to do a job. Not only did he not do the job for which he was paid, but he also callously disregarded my friend's business goals--the very goals he was paid to advance. That demonstrates a lack of integrity.My friend is upset about the loss of the business, yes; but I sensed he was more upset that the guy whom he hired abused his trust and took his money. That's the unkindest cut of all: When our trust is shattered.
In our business relationships, and more importantly in our personal relationships, our word is our bond. If you commit to doing something, do it. If you make a promise, you follow through. You don't accept payment for services you don't provide. You don't overcharge. You don't lie. You lead a life--personal and professional--of integrity.
You may not make a fortune leading such a life, but you can honestly say to yourself and to others that you have integrity.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Seth Godin's Got it Right: All Marketers ARE Liars
I'm currently reading Seth Godin's most recent book on marketing, All Marketers are Liars: The Power of Telling Authentic Stories in a Low-Trust World. Many of you reading this post may know of Godin's work from his previous books, Free Prize Inside!, Permission Marketing, and Purple Cow. Savvy marketers read Godin because we know he is often ahead of the curve regarding imminent developments in our field.
This time, though not ahead of the curve, Godin in his inimitable style captures a concept I've been advocating for years (although unlike Godin I did not write a book about it, and so cannot claim credit!): Stories sell our products and/or services. Stories get our target audience(s) emotionally invested in our products and/or service. Stories motivate and inspire people to buy, donate, support... To do whatever our call to action demands.
But not just any old stories will do. No, Godin says, and I agree, that "in an economy where most people have an infinite number of choices (and no time to make them), every organization is a marketer and all marketing is about telling stories." Throughout the book, Godin uses examples of how stories build or destroy brands.
Whenever I read professional development tomes, I note sections that I believe to be particularly important. I use sticky notes to mark the sections containing these "ah ha" revelations; when I've finished the book I copy the sections into a personal professional development notebook.
I started this practice soon after I left the U.S. Army in 1993, and have since amassed a collection of three completely full looseleaf notebooks. Looking back at some of the stuff from the mid-90s is like taking a walk through a long-forgotten junkyard of management and marketing ideas that were once revolutionary. Remember TQM? I rest my case.
I'd need a separate notebook solely devoted to the revelations I've picked up from Seth Godin--many of which came from reading this book, All Marketers Are Liars. I've never met the guy and he's not paying me for any endorsement. But if you want to get a better understanding of what it will take to be a successful marketing professional in the coming years, here are some excerpts from the book that demand your attention:
1) Page 25: "Positioning by Jack Trout and Al Ries is one of the most important marketing books ever. And it's a great start. But it's only a start. Positioning, as practiced by most people, is one dimensional. If they are cheap, we're expensive. They are fast, we are slow, and so on...
" ... Most learning about products and services and politicians goes on outside of existing paid marketing channels... Positioning in the world of the story is a longer, subtler, more involved process. It's three dimensional and it goes on forever."
2) Page 55: "... I think the best marketing goes on when you talk to a group that shares a worldview and also talks about it--a community." (Which reiterates the absolute importance of viral marketing. With so many ads and so many marketing messages bombarding us every day, to whom do we turn for trusted information? Our friends, our family, people who tell us believable stories.)
3) Page 80: "Now we know marketing=storytelling, and everything an organization does supports the story. So everyone is in the marketing department and a company either tells a story that people care about, or their story disappears."
"People make decisions big and small based on just one thing: The lie we tell ourselves about what we're about to do."
4) Page 84: "Stories let us lie to ourselves. And those lies satisfy our desires. It's the story, not the good or the service you actually sell, that pleases the customer."
5) Page 111: "We'd like to believe that efficient, useful, cost-effective products and services are the way to succeed. That hard work is its own reward. Most marketers carry around a worldview that describes themselves as innovators, not storytellers."
If you read Godin enough, you know never to stop at the end of his book. Oftentimes the best part is in the appendices, and true to form, Godin hits a few home runs in the additions to All Marketers Are Liars. Here are a few more excerpts:
1) Page 167: "For fifty years, advertising (and the prepackaged, one-way stories that make good advertising) drove our economy. Then media exploded. We went from three channels to five hundred, from no web pages to a billion. At the same time, the number of choices mushroomed. There are more than 100 brands of nationally advertised water... Starbucks offers 19 million different ways to order a beverage.
"In the face of all this choice and clutter, consumers realized that they have quite a bit of power. So advertising stopped working."
The bottom line: Tell a story. Make it authentic and believable. Tell it well. Tell it often. Tell it through a variety of communications mechanisms. Get feedback on your story (is it really believable?!).
This time, though not ahead of the curve, Godin in his inimitable style captures a concept I've been advocating for years (although unlike Godin I did not write a book about it, and so cannot claim credit!): Stories sell our products and/or services. Stories get our target audience(s) emotionally invested in our products and/or service. Stories motivate and inspire people to buy, donate, support... To do whatever our call to action demands.
But not just any old stories will do. No, Godin says, and I agree, that "in an economy where most people have an infinite number of choices (and no time to make them), every organization is a marketer and all marketing is about telling stories." Throughout the book, Godin uses examples of how stories build or destroy brands.
Whenever I read professional development tomes, I note sections that I believe to be particularly important. I use sticky notes to mark the sections containing these "ah ha" revelations; when I've finished the book I copy the sections into a personal professional development notebook.
I started this practice soon after I left the U.S. Army in 1993, and have since amassed a collection of three completely full looseleaf notebooks. Looking back at some of the stuff from the mid-90s is like taking a walk through a long-forgotten junkyard of management and marketing ideas that were once revolutionary. Remember TQM? I rest my case.
I'd need a separate notebook solely devoted to the revelations I've picked up from Seth Godin--many of which came from reading this book, All Marketers Are Liars. I've never met the guy and he's not paying me for any endorsement. But if you want to get a better understanding of what it will take to be a successful marketing professional in the coming years, here are some excerpts from the book that demand your attention:
1) Page 25: "Positioning by Jack Trout and Al Ries is one of the most important marketing books ever. And it's a great start. But it's only a start. Positioning, as practiced by most people, is one dimensional. If they are cheap, we're expensive. They are fast, we are slow, and so on...
" ... Most learning about products and services and politicians goes on outside of existing paid marketing channels... Positioning in the world of the story is a longer, subtler, more involved process. It's three dimensional and it goes on forever."
2) Page 55: "... I think the best marketing goes on when you talk to a group that shares a worldview and also talks about it--a community." (Which reiterates the absolute importance of viral marketing. With so many ads and so many marketing messages bombarding us every day, to whom do we turn for trusted information? Our friends, our family, people who tell us believable stories.)
3) Page 80: "Now we know marketing=storytelling, and everything an organization does supports the story. So everyone is in the marketing department and a company either tells a story that people care about, or their story disappears."
"People make decisions big and small based on just one thing: The lie we tell ourselves about what we're about to do."
4) Page 84: "Stories let us lie to ourselves. And those lies satisfy our desires. It's the story, not the good or the service you actually sell, that pleases the customer."
5) Page 111: "We'd like to believe that efficient, useful, cost-effective products and services are the way to succeed. That hard work is its own reward. Most marketers carry around a worldview that describes themselves as innovators, not storytellers."
If you read Godin enough, you know never to stop at the end of his book. Oftentimes the best part is in the appendices, and true to form, Godin hits a few home runs in the additions to All Marketers Are Liars. Here are a few more excerpts:
1) Page 167: "For fifty years, advertising (and the prepackaged, one-way stories that make good advertising) drove our economy. Then media exploded. We went from three channels to five hundred, from no web pages to a billion. At the same time, the number of choices mushroomed. There are more than 100 brands of nationally advertised water... Starbucks offers 19 million different ways to order a beverage.
"In the face of all this choice and clutter, consumers realized that they have quite a bit of power. So advertising stopped working."
The bottom line: Tell a story. Make it authentic and believable. Tell it well. Tell it often. Tell it through a variety of communications mechanisms. Get feedback on your story (is it really believable?!).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)