Monthly Archives: November 2009

Tiger Woods: Why We Care (and what we can learn)

Tiger the Golfer

Tiger the Golfer

Just about every crisis PR person on the planet says that Tiger Woods is handling his current PR problem in the wrong way. A quick recap: admit your problem, come out with it fast, don’t let someone else break your news.

OK, with that aside let me point out why we care: Tiger Woods isn’t just a person, he isn’t just a golfer, he’s a brand. For many companies he is their face and their reputation. Like many sports celebrities, his golfing is just a means to an end, it’s a way for him to keep a public persona so he can keep the ad dollars flowing.

How much? In September Forbes noted that Tiger became the world’s first $1 Billion athlete. ESPN predicted that Woods could be the $6 Billion man. In that article Rick Burton, director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon called Tiger “the perfect earner.”

And we, as consumers, continue to buy what Tiger tries to sell us. If we didn’t his promotional scheme wouldn’t work. So when callers on radio talk shows say things like “we should leave the guy alone,” they’re wrong.

Tiger the Famiy Man

Tiger the Famiy Man

We never left him alone, and it’s made him a wealthy man. But it’s also made him a public man.

Tiger the Brand

Tiger the Brand

That being said, we can learn a lot from this since we are now our own personal brands. Yes, you have a brand, you use it every time you Tweet, every time you put something on Facebook and every time you add to Google’s ever growing library that tells the story of you.

But worse, that brand can be threatened if you end up on the wrong end of a police investigation, or just have someone start badmouthing you on a blog. So listen to the advice of the crisis PR folks and file it away.

Just in case you find yourself in a car accident at 2:15am.

“Tiger Woods is the perfect earner,” says Rick Burton, director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon.

The Social Media Culture

I’ve been pondering a lot recently about the cultural changes that need to be put in place inside organizations to effectively implement Web 2.0 and social media across the enterprise. This recent research from SNCR ‘s Don Bulmer and Vanessa DiMauro shows the reach beyond marketing very clearly. I highly recommend you read this.

The research shows that social media is having a tremendous impact beyond the realm of just marketing: it’s impacting professional decision making. Here are the highlights of the research (directly from Don’s post):

1.  Professional decision-making is becoming more social – enter the era of Social Media Peer Groups (SMPG)

  • Traditional influence cycles are being disrupted by Social Media as decision makers utilize social networks to inform and validate decisions
  • Professionals want to be collaborative in the decision-cycle but not be marketed or sold to online; however online marketing is a preferred activity by companies.

2.  The big three have emerged as leading professional networks: LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter

  • The average professional belongs to 3-5 online networks for business use, and LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter are among the top used.
  • The convergence of Internet, mobile, and social media has taken significant shape as professionals rely on anywhere access to information, relationships and networks

3.  Professional networks are emerging as decision-support tools

  • Decision-makers are broadening reach to gather information especially among active users

4.  Professionals trust online information almost as much as information gotten from in-person

  • Information obtained from offline networks still have highest levels of trust with slight advantage over online (offline: 92% – combined strongly/somewhat trust; online: 83% combined strongly/somewhat trust)

5.  Reliance on web-based professional networks and online communities has increased significantly over the past 3 years

  • Three quarters of respondents rely on professional networks to support business decisions
  • Reliance has increased for essentially all respondents over the past three years

6.  Social Media use patterns are not pre-determined by age or organizational affiliation

  • Younger (20-35) and older professionals (55+) are more active users of social tools than middle aged professionals.
  • There are more people collaborating outside their company wall than within their organizational intranet

Why I'm Growing My Mo'

Me Before The Mo

Me Before The Mo

Two years ago in December, I lost my cousin to cancer. Not even two years later, I want the world to know I haven’t forgotten my cousin. That’s why I grew my mustache and goatee last year, and that’s why I shaved them and started over again this year.

(You may not have noticed because it takes so darn long for me to grow any facial hair. Therefore, here are a few pics for your enjoyment.)

And that’s why I’m asking for your help. Please contribute to me and my “Movember” team that is trying to help raise awareness and fight cancer.

Not My Real Mo

NOT My Real Mo

Here’s more on Brad Van Hoosear’s story…

In Loving Memory of Brad Van Hoosear (1970-2007)
Photo Copyright (c) Kay Phelan, uploaded by tvanhoosear

Brad Van Hoosear died in December 2007 of pancreatic cancer at the young age of 37. Here are some facts about pancreatic cancer, many from Brad’s mother, who was at Brad’s side throughout his terrible ordeal.

In 2007, The National Cancer Institute estimates 37,170 new cases of pancreatic cancer and 33,370 deaths in USA. Most people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer will have passed away by the end of the first year. Americans are twice as likely to be affected by pancreatic cancer that Europeans, for reasons unknown.

What My Mo REALLY Looks Like

What My Mo REALLY Looks Like

The symptoms of pancreatic cancer, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreatic_cancer, but verified elsewhere) include pain in the upper abdomen that typically radiates to the back and is relieved by leaning forward, loss of appetite, significant weight loss and jaundice. By the time you feel the pain from pancreatic cancer, however, it’s likely already beyond most typical cancer treatments currently available.

Furthermore, there are currently no non-intrusive, conclusive tests for pancreatic cancer beyond magnetic and sonic imaging that can pick up cancer masses, but which typically are only authorized after symptoms appear, when it’s already too late.

There are some known risk factors for the disease (the Wikipedia article lists several), and a few preventative measures, including quitting smoking, taking vitamin D, and eating foods rich in vitamins B12, B6 and folate.

A Young Life Lost to Cancer

The incidence of pancreatic cancer increases with age; most people are between 60 and 80 when they receive the diagnosis. Brad was 37. He was so young that, even though his symptoms were exactly those of the cancer, he was misdiagnosed because of his age. The doctor even said “If you were 60, I’d say you had pancreatic cancer.” Well, he did. But even if he had been diagnosed, it would’ve been too late.

There are people actively looking into ways to new treatment options. One such person is Michelle Calabretta, Ph.D., who blogs about her research at http://drmiggy.wordpress.com/ (she’s also on Twitter at http://twitter.com/drmiggy), but there are many others—you can read her blog for lots of good information and links to all kinds of cancer research, not just pancreatic.

In the U.S., pancreatic cancer is 9th or 10th most commonly diagnosed cancer (depending on gender), but the fourth leading cause of cancer death in men and women. The median survival period from the time of diagnosis until demise is arguably the worst of any of the cancers. The median survival for untreated advanced cancer of the pancreas is about 3 1/2 months; with good treatment this increases to about six months. Brad fought the disease for a year and a half—his youth and strength of spirit carried him.

I knew very little about this disease when Brad was first diagnosed. Quickly, however, I learned that a coworker’s cousin had died of it. When I tweeted about it yesterday (http://twitter.com/vanhoosear), more cases came out of the woodwork. In my network of 300+ Twitter followers, six wrote back saying they had lost a friend, acquaintance or family member to this disease! (Dozens more shared sympathy and support, for which I am very thankful, as is Brad’s direct family, with whom I shared this groundswell of support.)

A diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is a death sentence. There is no cure, few treatment options, and the 5 year survival rate is less than 5%. Despite this high mortality rate, the federal government spends woefully little money on pancreatic cancer research. It’s a very painful way to die, few treatments exist, and no cures.

The National Cancer Institute’s cancer research budget was $4.824 billion in 2004, an estimated $52.7 million of which was devoted to pancreatic cancer (1% of the budget for the fourth leading cause of cancer death in men and women). Research spending per pancreatic cancer patient is $1,145, the lowest of any leading cancer.

There are things you can do to help change this!

First, learn more about the disease. Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancreatic_cancer and http://tinyurl.com/24p83b.

Next, tell your friends and family about the disease, especially if they match a lot of the predisposing factors outlined in Wikipedia.

Remember that November is Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month. Buy a purple ribbon pin to show your support: http://tinyurl.com/2964gg.

If cancer has affected you personally, tell people about it. I’ve found the experience very fulfilling and comforting.

Finally, consider supporting awareness and research into treating this terrible disease. There are many causes out there. These are just a few:

My dear cousin left behind a very rich life, despite its shortness, wonderful memories for his friends and family (including myself), and one final, incredible gift. Brad’s final legacy was to donate his cancerous tissue to Dr. Iacobuzio-Donahue’s research department at Johns Hopkins University in the effort to help find a cure for this dreaded disease.

If you knew Brad, or have been moved by this particular case, please consider making a memorial donation directly to the work of Dr. Iacobuzio-Donahue in Brad’s honor:

“GI Medical Donation Program”
c/o Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue, MD, PhD
Dept of Pathology Johns Hopkins University
1550 Orleans Street, CRB II, Room 343
Baltimore, MD 21231
(410) 955-9132

Please include your name and address, and note that your donation is being made in memory of Bradley Van Hoosear.

Brad, thank you. You’ve inspired friends, family, and now hundreds of people online to think about pancreatic cancer, moving us one important step closer to treating, preventing and someday curing this terrible cancer.

You will be missed!

This post originally appeared on my old personal blog “Michigander in Mass,” and later on “More Than Marketing.”

The Chief Social Revenue Officer

Or, “Who Owns Social Media (Take 3)”

I continue to ponder the cultural implications of social media and Web 2.0. Last week I declared that the CEO owns social media, and I stand by that assertion. But this week I was prompted to ponder this further by a post from Amy Kenly on the Innovation Experts Network in LinkedIn. She asked (bold is LinkedIn’s):

How are manufacturers taking advantage of social computing & Web 2.0 technologies to raise the bar on product development performance? Where is the intersection of social computing, PLM & innovation?

She went on to share some insight into the question from PLM (that’s product lifecycle management for you non-manufacturing types) analyst Jim Brown from his article on “social product development”. Here’s an excerpt from that (bold is his):

The implications [of social product development on manufacturers] break down into two categories. The first implications are about the applicability and importance of social computing in product development. You have probably heard me talk about this before, and this report helps confirm and expand my thoughts on the subject. There is clearly something of value happening with the intersection of this exciting and popular new way of communicating and the business of developing profitable products.

The second set of implications fall into the category of practical advice and lessons learned to take advantage of this new opportunity. The opportunities are available, but the most important thing is that manufacturers don’t discount the applicability of social computing concepts based on their personal experience with Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, LinkedIn, or any other social networking sites. Manufacturers have to see through the use of these communication techniques for “fun” and see the significant business potential.

This potential will likely never come from the public social networking sites, but instead by incorporating these “Web 2.0? concepts into existing infrastructure and product development solutions. This is the most practical method to both achieve the value, but also ensure that product data and intellectual property (IP) is protected and that the solutions are used in the right context – to improve products and projects that drive corporate profitability.

This got me thinking about revisiting marketing titles and roles. My response to her:

Social product development is an excellent way to frame one facet of the impact of social on the enterprise — the other obvious area being social marketing.

Most companies have started with social marketing. Here’s the catch: if your business isn’t equipped to deal with what Josh Bernoff and Charlene Li call the Groundswell, you could find yourself in hot water when something goes really right or really wrong.

Social marketing is dangerous if the only public face is a lowly marketing intern, agency rep or other marketing person with no input into other aspects of the organization. If that person, however high up in the org s/he may be, cannot bring the engineering team, product management, HR, customer service or any other relevant team to bear to respond to issues raised in the public domain, they will get called out for it and put to task.

The “who owns social media” question has resurfaced recently, and my answer was the CEO. Now that may not be realistic in many organizations. Perhaps its time we created the role of the chief social officer, who can ensure that it all runs smoothly, and that the proper feedback loops are in place between marketing, engineering, customer service, management and the “crowd” or “tribe”.

Since I posted that Wednesday evening, I thought more about the implications of social across the organization. I’ve argued for quite a while that a big component of social media is cultural — and that implementing it across the organization requires some serious change management chops.

I also agree with Inc. Magazine that “title creep” is filling up the C-suite, so maybe a chief social officer is an unnecessary addition. Inc. calls out a still-growing recognition of the role of “chief revenue officer:”

The storied C Suite is getting a little more crowded, as CEOs, CFOs, CMOs, and CTOs make room for CROs, or chief revenue officers. Such executives typically are marketing officers on steroids–overseeing functions like sales, new product development, and pricing.

This revenue generating focus was called out in a post by Scott Gillum (again, bold is his):

So…the marketers that will be in the highest demand coming out of the recession will be the ones who have been aligned or have had direct responsibility for growing revenue. Marketers that can speak the language of sales. Unfortunately, it will be a slow process for folks with a Brand PR and Corp Comm or the Ex-Agency/Media guys.

Marketers with backgrounds in Product Management/Marketing who have owned a P&L, folks with sales backgrounds and/or marketers who can show that they can drive revenue/growth will be in demand first. The challenge for the other groups is that of supply. It’s not to say that good Brand and Agency folks won’t find positions it’s that it’s going to be hard. Expect that you will be [competing] with many other qualified candidates and it may be difficult to differentiate yourself.

While I will continue to argue that social media is owned by the CEO, I think all of this research shows that there’s a growing need for restructuring organizations to incorporate “social” across all functions — from finance to HR to engineering to customer support and, of course, to marketing. Perhaps the chief social officer is the conduit for that change, but maybe we ought to call him or her the chief social revenue officer. I’d love your thoughts on this role.

AOL PR Fail

Yesterday, AOL previewed its new identity to fairly mixed reviews. There’s plenty of conversation about the new logotype, which you can find simply by typing “AOL” in your favorite search engine. What I’m most curious is their resistance to adopting social media technology in their communications.

AOL's News Release

A Link-Free Press Release

As a member of the IABC working committee on the subject, I’ve been my own worst critic when it comes to the social media news release. It took an impassioned, patient conversation with Shel Holtz (that’s @shel for the record) to finally win me over. So I minght be the last guys you expect to criticize anyone for not adopting it. But the announcement of a new logo seems a perfect opportunity to try out a few extra bells and whistles with your news release, something AOL failed to do. If you have a look at the press release announcing the new design, the one thing obviously missing is the actual design, or even a link to the design. In fact, there are no graphics or even links to the new graphics in the press release at all.  In fact, there are no hyperlinks in the release at all, unless you count the automatically hyperlinked email addresses. I guess we’re just supposed to close our eyes and imagine what the new logo looks like.

Mind you, I’ve seen the design, and so has the entire tech community — no thanks to the news release, however. This indicates one of two things: either the press release is dead and AOL simply doesn’t care about them anymore, or AOL just doesn’t get it.

Digging (hah, get it?) even deeper, the press release as it’s shared on their corporate home page also includes no social bookmarking features, which even the staunchest social media haters have (however grudgingly) agreed to incorporate under pressure from the twenty-somethings in their communications department.

Something tells me AOL doesn’t get it. Perhaps freeing themselves from Time Warner will free up their thinking a little bit when it comes to embracing the new media. Dear AOL: I’ve done a little work for one of your subsidiaries in my past, and Chuck and I would love to help you “take the company into the next decade” as you shed the cobwebs of outdated technologies and twentieth century modes of thinking. Call me!