by adam

The Value of Program Management for Interactive Marketing

When most people hear "program management" they think "<yawn>."  It's not a sexy skill set, like User Experience Design, Web Strategy or Flash Development.  I've heard program managers jokingly referred to as "overhead."  They have been confused with Project Managers and can be accused of knowing a little about a lot of topics but being […]

Marketingplan
When most people hear "program management" they think "<yawn>."  It's not a sexy skill set, like User Experience Design, Web Strategy or Flash Development.  I've heard program managers jokingly referred to as "overhead."  They have been confused with Project Managers and can be accused of knowing a little about a lot of topics but being an expert in none.  I had a conversation with a good friend last week about whether program management skills could even add value in an advertising agency environment, whose halls are filled with right-brained creative wizards.  For crying out loud, the main homepage of a primary industry nonprofit for program managers, the International Association of Project and Program Management, has a voice welcome on it's homepage that could be the same guy who does the radio sponsor spots on NPR.  

In the words of Mitch McDeere, "It may not be sexy, but it's got teeth."

What is program management?

Wikipedia calls it "the process of managing multiple inter-dependent ongoing projects."  This could apply to several dozen or even thousands of projects.  Program management is a discipline that requires leadership, vision, creativity, organizational and political savvy, and communication.  The large IT consulting firms have figured out that program management is critical to the success of client initiatives.  My old firm Accenture actually created their own training class called Value Driven Program Management, emphasizing the focus on measuring outcomes and return on investment vs. the business case for an initiative.  I always thought that internally at the firm, this skill set was valued more than in the marketplace.

How does it apply to interactive marketing?

Interactive marketing, according to Wikipedia, is the "ability to address the customer, remember what the customer says and address the customer again in a way that illustrates that we remember what the customer has told us."  The online channel is a primary vehicle for interactive marketers who use search engines, email, web analytics, display advertising, optimized websites and (increasingly) social media to engage customers and drive their businesses.  Interactive marketing departments are typically full of deeply skilled SEO and SEM specialists, visual designers, marketing veterans and technologists.  

These marketing departments need the same leadership, coordination, and strategy to drive multiple disciplines, projects and campaigns to achieve goals for the company.  Good program managers in this space are influencing the outcome; they are navigating the marketing, sales and product development organizations in a company to align executive sponsors, building a roadmap and budget, energizing resources to execute on the vision, and measuring the results.  Retailers that do this well have campaigns online that match other channels, exploring multi-channel campaigns.  Who is behind making all of these marketing pieces come together, execute on plan and achieve the value for the company?  Program management.

What about agencies?

In the agency environment the program management domain is just as critical, with the added pressures and challenges of navigating both the internal and client organizations.  Traditional media and new media agencies need this skill set to execute and deliver – otherwise the creative talent will generate a lot of good work but may be disillusioned, unfocused and be at risk for not meeting the client's objectives or expectations.  This video is a parody of the client/agency relationship gone wrong (thanks to Kate Brodock):

How do you see the program management function in your organization?  Is the program management discipline at your company effective?  Why or why not?

photo credit: stephendann via flickr  … and no, that book was not written by yours truly but I'll have to check it out.

by adam

A suggestion for the Twitter Lexicon

For months I've been trying to come up with a term to describe the experience of meeting someone in person who I had previously only known on Twitter.  Twitter is a microblogging platform that has a low barrier to entry in terms of finding and making connections.  I've written about several Twitter-to-real-life experiences, and have […]

HandshakeFor months I've been trying to come up with a term to describe the experience of meeting someone in person who I had previously only known on Twitter.  Twitter is a microblogging platform that has a low barrier to entry in terms of finding and making connections.  I've written about several Twitter-to-real-life experiences, and have would like to float this suggestion out to the Twitter community of a term to describe them:

Tmeet1 verb, tmet (pt and pp of tmeet), tmeet-ing, noun

— verb (used with object)

1. to come upon; come into the presence of; encounter, after interaction through Twitter: "I was fortunate tmeet @phillymac in Cleveland after knowing of him through Twitter"
2. to become acquainted with; be introduced to, after interaction through Twitter:  "I tmet @worleygirl at the Forrester conference in April."
3. to come together, face to face, or into company, after interaction through Twitter: "We tmet at social media breakfast" or "I tmet @warrenss over lunch last week."
4. to become personally acquainted, after interaction through Twitter: "When @RichardatDELL tmet @tobydiva, it "felt like [he] had known her forever."

Each time I tmeet someone there is that aura of familiarity that reduces the awkward barriers of first conversation – many times it feels like we're old friends already.  Chris Brogan points out that an avatar helps, especially when tmeeting someone in person.  Is it worthy of everyday Twitter vocabulary?  We'd all save many keystrokes (precious in 140 character limits) and remove the "met in person for the first time" "meet someone in real life" and all other similar phrases.  What do you think? 

1 Borrowed some format and language from "meet." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 14 Aug. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/meet>.

photo credit: orinrobertjohn via flickr

by adam

Social Media Enhances Real World Relationships

Call me "Captain Obvious" for this one, but at a recent social media event it became clear to me that all of these social media platforms enhance real world connections.  I have made personal and professional connections that are stronger and more valuable to me as a result of interaction with social networks.  I will […]

Obvious Warning
Call me "Captain Obvious" for this one, but at a recent social media event it became clear to me that all of these social media platforms enhance real world connections.  I have made personal and professional connections that are stronger and more valuable to me as a result of interaction with social networks.  I will still continue to scrutinize who I connect to on each platform, but some recent examples of this:

  • Last week I set my Facebook status to indicate I'd be in New York City for a couple of days.  A few minutes later I received an invite from a couple of old friends I hadn't seen in more than ten years to join them for a reunion already planned that Wednesday night.  It was a blast, I have Facebook to thank – both for the reconnection to old friends and the facilitation of the interaction.  My college-aged cousins will laugh at this since they use Facebook like this all the time, many to actually coordinate most of their social lives.
  • Also last week at the Social Media Camp Boston event, Zach, Kate, Dmitri and I all marveled at how social media tools like Twitter helped make it easier to network, meet and share ideas – especially at social media events. Connecting online seems to reduce the barrier to entry and networking at events like that.  Social media also helps afterwards – my usual routine is to connect via Facebook or Linkedin to folks I meet at events, look to keep in touch, and perhaps down the road look for how we can be helpful to each other.  There is even a social media fundraiser in the works.
  • I've posted about the Twitter-to-real-life phenomenon before, but it seems to be happening more often.  I'm now connected to clients, business partners, co-workers and other industry folks on Twitter.  Months ago I struggled to find people I actually knew in person on Twitter, these days I have a network of professional contacts who I now now in person and can connect with in another way.  Last week I had lunch with Warren Sukernek (@warrenss on Twitter), who I had previously only met on Twitter – he was in the Boston area on vacation and agreed to meet.  Turns out we have a similar background in interactive marketing and roots in Metrowest Boston.

If it doesn't enhance a real world relationship in some way, isn't it just spam?  Okay, many folks build businesses exclusively through their online networks but for the majority of the folks using social media tools, would the tools be as popular if some sense of value wasn't being realized?  Sometimes it's easy to lose sight of the value these tools are providing and get caught up in the buzz.  How has social media benefited you recently, and what advice would you recommend to others?

For reference on the growth of social media, Len Devanna recently shared this presentation from Universal Mccann on how popular things are getting.  

Universal Mccann International Social Media Research Wave 3

View SlideShare presentation (tags: socialmedia research social media)
Photo credit: photosam1000 via Flickr

by adam

The Brand Factor: Do Established Brands Have It Easier?

Do big, well-known brands have it easier or harder than start-ups trying to make an impact and leveraging social media?  Jeremiah Owyang, the well known social media analyst from Forrester Research, recently wrote a very thoughtful post on the current challenges in social media.  I also recently attended Social Media Camp Boston, which had a number […]

Social MediaDo big, well-known brands have it easier or harder than start-ups trying to make an impact and leveraging social media?  Jeremiah Owyang, the well known social media analyst from Forrester Research, recently wrote a very thoughtful post on the current challenges in social media.  I also recently attended Social Media Camp Boston, which had a number of enterpreneurs presenting on tactics they take to leverage social media platforms.  This got me thinking – what types of companies lend themselves to social media?  I see three major factors that can help to answer this question, among others:

1.  "Traditional" Marketing and PR
2.  Budget for Social Media Efforts
3.  Community Leverage

Traditional Marketing and PR

Many large companies and established brands have yet to embrace and understand some of the tenets of social media.  They are unwilling to relinquish control of the message.  They struggle with fears of engaging customers directly and giving them a voice – looking to avoid negative PR instead of embracing customers and engaging customers.  They term "audience" is still used prevalently because of the one-way communication mindset, where "community," "listening" and "conversation" are not words some of these companies would associate with marketing. 

In some ways, this parallels a presentation I attended at Forrester's Marketing Forum called "The Interactive Marketing Maturity Model."  Shar Van Boskirk did an excellent job capturing four levels of maturity in embracing interactive marketing, which I believe also applies to leveraging social media:

  • "Skeptics," characterized by little or no interactive experience and assessing if interactive has value for them
  • "Mavericks," organizations that have a few isolated team members that appreciate interactive and run stand-alone programs but lack support to improve current efforts
  • "Practitioners," companies who have several years of experience and are piloting emerging media, and
  • "Optimizers," who have company-wide support for interactive efforts and are working to optimize multi-channel (including offline) efforts.1

With very few "optimizers" out there in the big corporations, it can be difficult for those companies to bridge the gap and trully leverage social media.  They need to retain talent in the industry, like Ford's recent hire of Scott Monty and Nationwide's recent hiring of Shawn Morton.

On the flip side, smaller startup organizations can be more nimble and have few constraints around controlling the brand message.  A great example of this is Freshbooks, led by chief "magic maker" Saul Colt.  Their entire marketing approach is to build a community of passionate users and embrace their customers with open and earnestly helpful dialog.

Budget for Social Media Efforts

More traditional organizations will ask the ROI question.  As Jeremiah points out, it's difficult to measure ROI on "engagement" and no industry standard exists.  Larger established brands may be less willing to take risks – where startups practically need to take a risk to differentiate themselves.  An untapped, unproven landscape in social media is ripe for startups (even though they may be spending funding rather than profits).  Albert Maruggi of the Marketing Edge, thinks companies need to get past the ROI question, using magazines' spending $14 million to buy a baby picture of Brangelina's kids as an example.

I think it should be easier for larger companies to allocate budget (including resources) to focus on social media due to their scale and the relatively low barrier to entry of leveraging many of these tools.  Sometimes process and a lack of executive sponsorship get in the way.

Community Leverage

Another factor in determining whether big brands have it easier is whether they already have a community to tap into.  Nike's Jordan division is a well known and loved brand – leveraging social media platforms and tools should be easy since there are passionate fans out there who would willingly participate.  For crying out loud, people fight and even risk lives in getting a hold of the latest shoe design. 

Smaller startups need to build communities, one person at a time.  Melanie Notkin has done a terrific job at building a community over months leading up to the launch of SavvyAuntie.com, using her blog, Facebook, and Twitter.  It can be arguably harder to build a community than to engage one that exists, but I'd be interested to hear from folks who have more expertise on each before I decide on that one.

So which is it?

Do big brands have it easier or harder leveraging social media?  Are there other factors to consider?  Please take the poll and let me know what you think.

1 Source: The Interactive Marketing Maturity Model, Shar Van Boskirk, Forrester Research, April 9, 2008.
Photo credit: mrwilleeumm via Flickr

by adam

Nintendo: Simple = Good

This weekend while playing with my oldest son, we saw spotted a note online about connecting our Nintendo Wii with his Ninendo DS for a game he already has.  He’s really into Pokemon, so I figured I would try to learn about it and see if we could get the connection to work.  In less […]

Mattel Football This weekend while playing with my oldest son, we saw spotted a note online about connecting our Nintendo Wii with his Ninendo DS for a game he already has.  He’s really into Pokemon, so I figured I would try to learn about it and see if we could get the connection to work.  In less than 5 minutes and a few keystrokes, we had connected the DS, a small, handheld gaming system with Wifi capabilities, to the Wii, and “deposited” all of the creatures he had captured in the handheld game into a “Pokemon Ranch.”  At the ranch you can interact with the creatures, take pictures of them (even putting them on an SD card for saving/viewing/sharing later) and give them toys to play with.  Each day “Hayley,” the Ranch helper, gives you another creature to play with.  So what if the Wii game isn’t the most exciting in the world – to a seven year old budding Pokemon addict, it was heaven.


I was, quite frankly, blown away.  I grew up with (and still love) the Mattel Electronic Football II, with it’s red dashes, and here was my 7 year old son connecting his handheld wirelessly to a gaming console to enhance his gaming experience.  Nintendo kept the technology so simple a 2nd grader could figure it out and use it to feed his Pokemon obsession. 


Keeping it simple is an essential element for new technology to be successful.  I’m not surprised at the continual demand for the Wii and for the DS – and it may be a long time before either platform reaches an ‘end of life’ phase.  What are some other examples where technology made things simpler for you or your family?  Gaming is one thing, but what are some products or technology that have made things simple and improved your life?


Photo credit: dcjohn via flickr

by adam

1 + 1 = 3: Rosetta and Brulant

How do you build a top digital agency? In July Rosetta announced the acquisition of interactive agency Brulant, where I am a partner in the Consumer Product and Retail practice.  The first couple of days since the announcement have been some of the most fun in my career.  The two firms build a compelling value proposition when combined, […]

Rosetta Acquires Brulant How do you build a top digital agency?

In July Rosetta announced the acquisition of interactive agency Brulant, where I am a partner in the Consumer Product and Retail practice.  The first couple of days since the announcement have been some of the most fun in my career.  The two firms build a compelling value proposition when combined, and I’ve spent a better part of those two days calling clients and friends to talk about it.

Acquisitions and mergers have negative connotations to many folks.  They can mean personnel conflicts, culture clashes and diluting of the “juice” that makes either one of the parties successful – not to mention distractions to high performing project teams.  I have friends who have been through it in the digital industry (think large conglomerates eating up smaller independent agencies), and there are many horror stories.  In stark contrast, being a part of this merger is ripe with excitement and promise.  We remain independent, and the services each agency provides complement each other.

“We are creating one of the nation’s biggest interactive agencies which will allow us to grow current relationships and build new ones quite dramatically,” said Chris Kuenne, Rosetta’s founder, chairman and CEO. “The interactive marketing landscape is rapidly shifting from mass to personalized targeting and from fuzzy equity measures to precisely measured, managed and optimized customer relationship economics.”

There is a science behind the shift from traditional media to targeted, personalized marketing, and Rosetta has figured it out.  Look at their client list– these are advanced organizations where how they market is a key differentiator in their success.  Infuse that with the execution capabilities of the teams I’ve watched deliver at Brulant, and it’s a powerful combination.

“You put your chocolate in my peanut butter!”

Rosetta is technically acquiring Brulant, but in reality the firms complement each other.  The breadth of Brulant’s interactive services in customer experience, acquisition marketing and technology implementation are the “chocolate” to Rosetta’s marketing strategy and personalized targeting offerings “peanut butter.”   The value proposition of bringing those capabilities together, along with the ever growing significance of the online channel and its influence on other channels, is a compelling service offering that puts Rosetta in a unique place in the market.  (I’m actually writing that because I believe it; it wasn’t spoonfed by our marketing team, I promise.)

Hey, that sounds great, but we have a lot of work to do.  On the first day of the announcement being public, I had the privilege of sitting with one of our top clients and the CEOs of both Brulant and Rosetta.  It was very clear in the conversation that the value proposition can be applied right away, and I will be spending lots of time with the “legacy” Rosetta team to understand their offering more in the coming weeks.

New opportunities

For me personally, this provides an opportunity to work with talented people and expand my professional horizons up the value chain.  Being in Boston and working on several clients in the New York City area, I am thrilled to see the expansion in the Northeast. This is also the first time I have been through an acquisition and watched an integration team get up and running.  I look forward to participating in building the new organization.  Can’t wait to see it in action and share what I learn, and I look forward to working with the Rosetta team. 

Have you been through an acquisition?  What are some pitfalls you’ve seen?  How would you advise we keep the momentum going through this exciting time with all of the “buzz”?

Check out Rosetta.com for more information.

Rosetta

by adam

Choose Wisely: Scrutinizing Your Social Network Connections

Last week I conducted an overview of social media for a client.  After the meeting, I executed my usual drill: I followed up by taking business cards and checking if all the meeting attendees I hadn’t met before were on LinkedIn and Facebook, and sent out a series of thank you notes through those tools and requested […]

Last week I conducted an overview of social media for a client.  After the meeting, I executed my usual drill: I followed up by taking business cards and checking if all the meeting attendees I hadn’t met before were on LinkedIn and Facebook, and sent out a series of thank you notes through those tools and requested connections.  In an email response, one of them asked me flat out, “So tell me how you stay in touch with 500+ LinkedIn folks??”  That got me thinking about how I leverage these tools personally.


Everyone has a different level of scrutiny on who would be a suitable connection in social networks.  LinkedIn has an army of folks who refer to themselves as LION – LinkedIn Open Networkers.  I’m clearly not one of those and try to ‘filter’ connection requests a bit.  While people in some professions, like recruiting, may value hoarding connections and “friends” on these tools, I’ve tried to stick to a guideline depending on the tool.  The following chart shows how I use some of the major networks out there, with the size of each circle representing the relative number of connections I have in each as of this post:


Social Media Tools



Set Parameters For Using Social Media Platforms


I primarily utilize 3 tools the most right now: Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.  Friendfeed is growing on me too. I could see that changing over time and have played around with many others for different purposes, like Dopplr, Plaxo Pulse, BrightKite, Upcoming, and others.  For now I’ll compare my daily usage, scrutiny of connections and number of connections on each of the major social networks I use.  I’d be interested in what works for you and whether you have set a “guideline” for using the same tools.

  • For LinkedIn, I prefer to keep the connections to people I know personally or have met in a business context.  Lately I’ve been meeting many in the social media space through events in Boston, but I will use LinkedIn like a rolodex that maintains itself once I connect.  I have many connections who are colleagues from the past and present, business partners and many clients as well.  I check the site regularly, but not much interaction going on.  I like to ask and answer the occasional question but there isn’t too much else that is sticky for me.  It is a great way to keep up with friends who change jobs over time, and I value that 98% of my connections are people I really know and could refer someone to down the road.  I’ve been a LinkedIn user for many years and like the direction the site is taking with adding more “Web 2.0” features.
  • For Facebook, I use a similar guideline – although there are many more people I know in a non-business context there including high school, college, elementary school and especially summer camp.  I do check Facebook regularly and am amazed at the velocity of new joiners.  There are more conversations happening in groups and commenting on photos, and the “stickiness” is improving.  I ignore many of the application requests out there unless I’m investigating how one works (or talking the occasional Red Sox trash).  I do value the interaction greatly but more in a friendly context and less so (although still relevant) for business purposes.
  • On Twitter, I have a much lower level of scrutiny on connections – I will block a spammer or someone with a high following to follower ratio, but if someone has something interesting to say, I’m happy to follow.  I find that Twitter has a very low barrier to entry, not to mention great tools for finding people, searching conversations for folks with similar interests, and learning about the platform.  The value is in the conversation, sharing of information and the constant flow of information.  I try to share and contribute there but it can be very time consuming if time management isn’t a strong suit.
  • Friendfeed is helping me to not chase down the same people across many Web 2.0 services.  I like it, I connect to someone with the same level of scrutiny as Twitter, but I haven’t spent enough time with it yet to become mainstream for me.  I also haven’t taken the time to build up connections yet.
  • Honorable mention is Plaxo Pulse (not going to share my link but feel free to find me).  I just can’t get into Plaxo – of hundreds of connections, a handful there are unique to that site.  I am already connected to people on LinkedIn or Facebook.  There’s something about the UI I just don’t like, but the sharing of feeds is helpful and “Friendfeed”-like. 

It’s important to set some parameters for how you leverage the tools.  What works for you? How do you choose who you connect to?  Do you have different standards in each network?  What are the pros and cons of your approach?