Networking is a waste of time…

Yes, networking is a waste of time…

…if you can’t answer the question, “So, what do you do?”

This is a common networking question that everyone should be able to answer. Interestingly, however, few actually answer it. Like a good politician or crisis management firm, most people answer the question they wish they had been asked, the easier one to answer. Instead of answering the question “So, what do you do?”, they’ll tend to answer a different question. “So, what do you do?” becomes “What is your title?” or “What can you do?”. Answer those two questions instead and you are just wasting your time by networking.

Instead, “So, what do you do?” is best accepted as a marketing question, as if someone rang up your office and said, ‘let me speak to a salesperson’. Treat the question this way and you’ll immediately focus on the value you provide – not a laundry list of capabilities or a corporate title earned that may or may not suggest anything about what value you or your company can offer others.

And if you aren’t certain of the value you offer others, how do you expect anyone else be expected to figure it out? 

That's a clown question, bro.

Who knew? Ron is a brand ambassador. But, "what, at this point, does it matter?"

To belatedly welcome 2014 to this blog, I lazily link you to this spot-on criticism of the makeover of make of Ronald McDonald.

Build a marketing plan using old school journalistic style

There are as many ways to write a marketing plan as there are marketers in the business. Ultimately, each has to answer six fundamental journalistic questions, that is, akin to the 5 Ws (and one H) taught in any undergrad journalism school:  WHO am I selling to? WHAT am I selling? WHERE will I sell it? WHEN will I sell it? WHY will they buy it? HOW will I reach my customer?

WHO you are selling to is your demographic and psychographic, who they are and what makes them tick. “Everyone” isn’t helpful. Even products that have nearly 100% saturation identify their customers and those customers’ unique reasons for buying.

WHAT you are selling is less obvious than simply naming the product. It encompasses the reason the product was created, the problem it was meant to solve.

WHERE you sell it is key to reaching the correct demographic, above. You can’t reach the middle class at Tiffany’s, you can’t reach the super-rich at Target. And you can’t reach anyone if the display and packaging fails to engage the shopper.

WHEN you sell a product is more than seasonality, it can also, and more often does, involve identifying the ‘compelling event’ that triggers a desire for the product. Experience, such as a burglary that precipitates a security system sale; information,  such as a health alert on the news the encourages a purchase of a supplement are important to understand.

WHY will customers buy it? What alternative do they have? What are the competitive, ‘substitution’ products? What do people do without your product? What benefit does only your product offer? This is oversimplifying a critical part of the plan, so take some time to really study current and desired consumer behavior.

HOW will you reach them? This is the last part of the puzzle – the tactics. The ads, the media, social outlets, PR, events. The marketing mix that makes customers aware of and interested in your product or service.

The format and style of the marketing plan is not important. As long as it addresses and honestly answers these critical questions, it will improve your chances for success exponentially. 

Why marketers owe a debt of gratitude to IT

In this Forbes article by Eric Lai of SAP, Lai addresses a recent report from Gartner that predicts marketers will outspend CIOs in just a few more years.

As I've been saying for years, marketing is far broader than marketing communications, the role with which it is often wrongfully equivocated as marketers become increasingly reliant on data to drive decision-making .

Today Mr. Wanamaker would know which half of his advertising is wasted because today's Wanamakers have professional, data driven marketers fine tuning lead generation, demand generation, lead nurturing, campaign analysis, social media automation, mobile marketing, and so forth.

It's the thing of science, not art, and marketing is increasingly the purveyor of both, making marketing a 'real job' in the eyes of executives and mothers-in-law alike.

Three rules for managing third party resources

Harvard Business Review publishes an interesting article here on how smaller companies can hire third party services to get the same data insight (as in the case featured) or resources as bigger competitors. Managing these resources is a separate issue altogether, but there are best practices for getting the most out of, well, companies like mine. Essentially this involves three key areas: Shared objectives, regular benchmarking, and communication.

When a tree falls: The one skill every marketer needs

A fallen tree in a field. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’ve mentored students and spoken at many industry luncheons and as a result I am asked more than occasionally what the skills are for a successful marketer. Not a run-of-the-mill, forms-filling automaton, but a ‘real’ marketer, one that is insightful, creative, innovative, and focused on results.

 
The good news is that it’s really simple, but the bad news is, it can’t be taught. What separates outstanding marketing professionals from the merely satisfactory is the ability to actively listen.

And right now, reading this, you’re wearing the same expression I get when I say it to others face-to-face.

“Yeah, yeah, I get that,” they’ll say. “But what else?”

“Nothing, that’s it,” I’ll reply.

“But they need to be able to write, right? Or design? Or understand statistics? Or ‘know’ social media?”

Silence.

“Okay, so you’re all about results, right? So they need a finance background?”

Well, maybe, but that will define what kind of marketer they’ll be. What field, what industry, what specialty. But listening is what will make the difference whether they are good at the process of marketing or good at intuitively understanding audiences and the messages required to reach them. And that’s what really matters.

Especially in an age where marketing is about relationships above all else, good marketing increasingly resembles any decent relationship. And we all know (directly or indirectly!) that relationship counselors will remind us that all relationship issues eventually boil down to listening to what the other is saying.

In business, communication used to mean managing what we say as companies. What, how and when we express our brand, our values, and our products’ benefits. But if anything at all has changed in the past couple of decades, it is that communication has a great deal more to do with listening than talking.

It starts before the first pen is put to paper planning a first product, and doesn’t stop even after the product is launched to an eager marketplace. It’s a cycle of listening and iteration. Listening so closely that you can hear what isn’t even being said so you can build a product and create a story that users didn’t expect but that absolutely captivates them. And that’s when they’ll start talking... and their friends and peers will be listening.

So if a tree falls in the forest and there’s no one there to hear it… what does it matter anyway?

Related articles

• How Pharma is Learning to "Listen" Online
• The 12 most cringe-worthy business phrases
• You're So Vain, I Bet You Think This Post Is About You...

Fast and cheap and unsuccessful

New entrepreneurs. Committed to a diet of macaroni, peanut butter and cases of Mountain Dew for late night 'ideation' sessions. They tell me they're going to be better... because they're faster and cheaper. 

Copying what has been done before in a way that is faster or cheaper is a formula for long-term failure.

Faster and cheaper is not better. Better is better.  

Instead, the success formula is a disruption - a new way to look at things, a new way to define your market. Faster and cheaper is a natural order of established markets, so start-ups dedicated to this proposition will be overrun. Even if you go 'all-in', spend all the angel's money, live a life of sleep-deprived sacrifice to build the mousetrap, there is no guarantee of success if all you are chasing is a faster or cheaper way to do an old thing. Faster and cheaper are only useful long-term when they are outgrowths of the new and differentiated.

If all your new idea offers is a faster or cheaper way to do an old thing, think again.  

Related articles

• A Personality Test for Entrepreneurs
• Are You An Entrepreneur?
• Start-Up Entrepreneurs: 5 Lessons Learned From The Founders Of Instagram

A Living Death

George A. Romero was an early contributor to the genre with his 1968 film, Night of the Living Dead. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

No, this post isn't about the Zombie Apocalypse, although that'd get a lot of page views. Its about yet another pundit suggesting something is dead. That too gets page views. Death, vampires, and celebrities. Dead celebrity vampires are especially good for page views. But I digress.

No, this post is about a recent speech to the IoD given by Saatchi and Saatchi CEO Kevin Roberts who boisterously proclaimed (as ad people are fond of doing) the following things as dead:

Marketing.
Value Statements.
Strategy.
The 'Big Idea'.

Suddenly I'm not feeling too good myself.

In fact, these things are not dead, they are merely changing. I'd use a caterpillar/butterfly analogy here but I fear metaphors may be dead too.

Marketing used to be about positioning, segmentation, and anticipating customer needs. Roberts says that approach is dead because change is too rapid today. Essentially, he says, think too long about it and 'poof!' its different and you're on the wrong track.

That's not death, that's just an acknowledgement of the importance of agility. Marketing requires greater agility than ever before. It means marketers have to listen more than ever before.

Value statements are dead and dreams are in. Dreams are in all right, dreams in the form of stories that register with customers. That's not death, that's an ability to convey moods, emotions, and to create relevance for your brand among customers. Tell a story, don't recite a fact... build a relationship, not a transaction.

Strategy involves too much consideration in a hyper world. Take an action, any action. Strategy is death. Still, if you don't have a destination in mind, to paraphrase the Cheshire Cat, any road will get you there. Strategy isn't dead. Analysis paralysis is dead.

Big ideas are dead, small ideas are where the excitement is. A series of ideas appealing to segments to build relationships that taken together add up to that one... big... idea. Dead? No. Chopped into little pieces to create something new? Very much alive.

Marketing isn't dead. It's just that the margins for error are slimmer. So the decisions we make now as marketers just appear more, well, life or death. 

Related articles

• The Future of Marketing: 5 Hot Job Trends
• Bell breathes life into agency

Extreme Couponing: Mobile Shoppers and the New Face of Mobile Couponing

In this article, my friend and colleague Brian Morrison, President at Ipsh!, the mobile marketing agency of Dallas' The Marketing Arm (I think that makes him a thumb) discusses how mobility, couponing, and a weak economy are combining to create an exceptional opportunity for mobile marketers to drive more business.

Mobile Shoppers and the New Face of Mobile Couponing

Fear itself.

Only a few times in my career have I had to address fear as a key obstacle to a new product introduction.

Of course, fear is ever-present in doing or buying anything new, but not often is it in the top three. And rarely fear, as such. In marketing, that is, in encouraging a buying decision, fear is more often wrapped in something less... well, absolute. Uncertainty, not fear. Caution, not fear. Inertia, not fear.

Fear is more real, more certain, and more an obstacle than any other faced by marketers. Fear as represented by the perceived lack of control. A lack of control is never overcome in the real sense, but only mitigated through trust.

Trust in turn is encouraged through understanding, established with a relationship, built through consistency, preserved through responsiveness, and confirmed through repetition - selling to and buying of - a loyal customer.

That is nothing new, as although it takes longer to overcome, the fear obstacle is addressed by simply doing what we as marketers know we ought to be doing all along... understand our market, develop a relationship with them, deliver products and services with consistent quality, respond quickly and appropriately to problems and questions, ... and repeat. Other than that, it is, ironically, out of our control how quickly we can make customers feel sufficiently in control to try something new.

So when management, sales, or product grow concerned that uptake of a new product or service is slower than predicted, you'll know that all things being equal, simply staying on track and by doing the right things right, it will happen in time.

Comfort them with FDR's words: "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself."

The Oldest Profession

In this excellent Advertising Age op-ed by Les Marguiles, he addresses the critical importance of the agency-client relationship, or increasingly, the lack of one.

I can boil my take on the piece by suggesting that those marketers who allow their companies to commoditize service companies' efforts deserve what they get in the shoddy product returned from those desperate firms who won a project based on costs and terms alone - and therefore see no long term opportunity with the client.

Conversely, and importantly, those service providers – agencies, consultants, what have you – who accept that their work can be commoditized and are therefore willing to forego basic standards of quality of service, creative, and responsiveness also deserve what they get from clients who take that unique value for granted.

I remind my small agency colleagues of the following exchange, often attributed to Winston Churchill:

Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill… Well, I suppose… we would have to discuss terms, of course…
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are just negotiating the price.

I'd rather fight than switch.

Like the BBD&O Tareyton cigarette ads of years past illustrated ("Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch"), most companies rely on brand loyalty to drive sales of their products among loyalists. Investing in initiatives to build this loyalty is the most effective means of creating easy recurring revenue and lowering costs while gaining share. Yet every day, consumers do change their habits - sometimes temporarily in response to a low price, sometimes permanently when a new product is proven superior. The objective for new product managers is to encourage first use - the first trial of a product among target consumers - in order to create a wedge between their buying preferences (or habits) and a new alternative.

CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) manufacturers are particularly involved in a this daily battle, often times a battle between brand managers in the same company (P&G, for example, regarding dish soap).

In a new report from the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), Booz & Co. and SheSpeaks, Shopper Marketing 3.0: Unleashing the Next Wave of Value, the authors state three critical weaknesses in the current battle brand strategies - all carry a similar theme, that is, too much concern regarding out-of-store promotion and a disregard for where 59% of purchase decisions are made - in store (pricing, shelf placement, and product packaging). While in-store promotion, pricing and packaging isn't sexy, it is effective. Marketers are often easily distracted by the excitement of promotional activity and the dynamics of mass-market tools, clever use of new media, and the like, but as I've stated before, the marketing function should be, arguably, less than 25% promotion. This report underscores that for CPG - but it can apply to B2B as well - that price, product and placement are very critical factors, particularly the latter when in-store displays, packaging, and 'shelf talkers' (shelf signage) are so very influential to shoppers - 77% of whom do not shop with a list, much less carry a hardened loyalty to a specific brand.

For me, once again this is a reminder that the critical value of marketing lies outside the clever graphics and innovative viral games. While still important, it is actually the pricing, product positioning, and placement that combined with promotion makes the needle move. Marketing must embrace more than promotion - and then measure and use analytic tools if they are ever going to be seen as equal professionals in the boardroom.

And that's a switch worth the fight.

The Cure For What Ails Ya?

The turn-of-the-(20th) century practice of ‘snake-oil’ salesmen travelling the country to sell remedies of questionable efficacy has returned in the form of ‘Patent Marketing’, a term I’ve coined to play off ‘Patent Medicine’, the term given these early ‘medicines’.

I am seeing a lot of ads for – and an increasing number of small start-ups buying – crowd-sourced logo development, marketing plan builders, and social media starter kits touted as an inexpensive equivalent for professional guidance - and by extension, purposeful reflection and consideration on the part of business owners themselves.

I understand the appeal of these services. We are a society of the easy fix, the cheap alternative, a society where Wal-mart sets the expectation. Plus, much of marketing and advertising can appear on the surface as obvious and intuitive. (The reason for this is that generally, 'the obvious and intuitive' was created by marketers who created that perception from the complicated and obscure, but I digress.) Marketing, it then appears, is certainly not the province of supposed ‘experts’ – many of which by my own admittance, aren’t worth a tinker’s damn themselves.

Still, it is simple due diligence to find a consultant with whom you can feel confident. One that knows, or is committed to learning, your industry and your business. One that will take your lead but feels confident not to necessarily follow it. One with relevant experience that allows them to apply past experiences and ask the right questions.

The idea of selling ‘Mad Libs’ style pre-written marketing plans or picking a logo contest winner is worse than doing nothing at all: it is potentially destructive. It allows sloppy thinking, hides what might be an under-capitalization of the business, reinforces marketing as a support, and therefore, optional, function, and suggests that marketing’s end game is a document or advertisement, and not an ongoing process of communication with stakeholders.

Your business is unique. Can what you are selling be reduced to a document like an off-the-shelf lease agreement? If the communication with your customers can be reduced to being positioned like every other business that purchases your same ready-made document, then perhaps that’s all the differentiation that you can muster for your own product or service. And ultimately that’s another way these services are truly destructive, providing insufficient differentiation and discounting the real value of your product or service.

Snake oil remedies were touted as a cure for ‘what ails ya’, but were generally loaded with opiates that made the patient feel good for just long enough for the salesman to pack up his wagon and move on. If you are in business for the long haul, you’ll need a better prescription.

Top 5 Things In Marketing I’d Like To See Change In 2010

My full list of Things In Marketing I’d Like To See Change In 2010 is actually quite a bit longer than this, but I haven't an entire day to dedicate to crafting that long of a blog entry. So for now, I'll leave you with my Top 5. May we see an end to:

1. The exponential growth in Social Media 'experts'. You’re young, you’re plugged in, you’re mayor of a half-dozen Foursquare sites, and you’ve attended a keynote by Chris Brogan. This does not make you an expert. Having a Facebook page doesn’t make you an expert to anyone except your elderly great aunt. After all, I have a dog but this does not make me a veterinarian. (If you need a real SM expert, let me know. I can refer you to a great one.)
   
2. Abandoned experiments in New Media. Whether it’s a blog, a Facebook page or a Twitter feed, the Web 2.0 landscape is as littered with abandoned efforts as Mount Everest is with abandoned oxygen bottles. Honestly, know what you are getting into. Bad, but improving, efforts are laudable. Abandoned efforts just create a mess of your brand.
3. Hearing the same thing said more than twice. There is only one Seth Godin or Tom Peters. Chances are, they are not the only one who’s had the same thought, so it’s possible it’s been thought or articulated twice. But really, if you’ve read it already, rewording it doesn’t make it yours. Credit where credit’s due.
4. Marketing used as a synonym for MarCom. Marketing professionals are responsible for allowing themselves to be limited to ‘prettying up’ PowerPoint slides. There are 4 Ps in McCarthy’s model, not just one. I’d like to see more marketing departments taking the lead on more than Promotion. Marketing needs to lead in Product, Placement and Pricing as well. And it has a lot to offer in the area of People and Purpose too.
   
5. Fog over facts. There is no excuse to do anything in marketing that isn’t supporting a specific, measurable objective. If marketing professionals cannot quickly and confidently answer the question, “What is our specific objective with this initiative?” clearly and quickly if asked, then chances are it shouldn’t be done. And if no one is asking, that’s a problem in itself.

What would you like to see different in the industry in the New Year?

The price is falling! The price is falling!

Just a note for the editors of marketing pubs out there: "how to market in a sagging economy" articles have been done. To death. Okay, we get it. Preaching to the choir here. Move on.

Its a valid subject, but most of these articles are promotion-oriented. What hasn't been discussed as much is the role of price strategy in a sagging economy, and generally. This especially occurs to me today because of a current client project, where pricing strategy is the current key gating concern prior to product launch.

Obvious Secret #1: Pricing strategy, especially in a weak economic environment, has little to do with, well, price.

Even in the best of times, great products, great promotions, clever ads and a loyal base can be undone by a misguided or misapplied pricing strategy. This is because left to their own devices, finance and sales executives will see sagging demand as a numbers issue and not a brand issue. Plus, it is expedient to react instinctively with a red pen (cutting prices) when profits shrink and sales falter.

Bad plan.

Unstudied discounts are not as easily undone tomorrow as they are done today. Price cuts are a short term solution to a larger, longer term issue; that is, the product hasn't established the brand position to maintain margin in a discount environment. Understand that price cuts are welcomed by consumers but always create subtle dissonance - an inability on the part of the consumer to properly relate price to value, so when the market returns upward, as it always does, this results in a nearly Sisyphean effort to re-establish a brand position held prior to the discount. Pricing is not a cost issue - it is a value issue.

Understand the way customers make buying decisions and become far more visible, and more efficient, in delivering on these criteria; this will always be more effective in building recession-proof brands. This is because pricing is a long-term strategy, not a short term tool. When the economy sours, there are other levers to pull - operating costs, added value, extended hours, free upgrades. Think about supplier pricing and work new billing models to manage cash flow. Invest in money-saving IT investments such as Unified Communications and collaboration products. Reevaluate your market position and consider new marketing initiatives to go after markets competitors might have recently abandoned. Fire some costly customers. Adjust invoicing offers and procedures to improve cash flow and reduce defaults. These tools and others are manipulated in good times and bad with far greater flexibility than price, which can only move in two directions: up, or down.

Its easy to be Chicken Little and think in blocks of fiscal-quarter-bound panic over a current fiscal situation, but creating and applying the right principles for pricing allows for decisions that over time not only weather current storms, but position a company for consistent growth over the long haul.

On worry and inaction

Jeremy Kloubec, a former colleague of mine now with consulting organization Infosys, writes recently about the dire unrealized predictions facing the VC community just a year ago. He details the shifts in the industry and partially credits the architects of the still-nascent recovery programs.

His comments reminded me of something my mother often said: "95% of things you worry about never come to pass."

Of course, its that 5% that keep us up at night.

As it pertains to our business life, if, as Peter Drucker is credited with stating, "the best way to predict the future is to create it", then 100% of our angst can be squeezed to 5% insignificance by the simple act of doing. Dire warnings and worry generally come with the same highly unlikely assumption: "If things do not change, ..." That peculiar assumption ignores the fact that humans - particularly capitalist humans - are not given to inaction. Even our base 'fight or flight' instinct indicates an action of one type or another. Change is inevitable.

And so it is with this crisis. We're not out of it, not by a long shot, and our myriad collective and individual actions will differ in effectiveness and certainly create new crises even as they create new solutions. But our reactions to events and the actions we take are all we've got and will continue to alter the linear path.

If history is any guide, that's more than enough.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Drucker at 100: What Will You Do Differently on Monday? (blogs.harvardbusiness.org)

Thank you, Captain Obvious

So I just got this email... sent by a company that sells 'dashboard' marketing management software - to me, a professional marketer.

Know your product (marketing software), know your audience (marketer). So far so good.

But the first line of copy?

"Remember when marketers with the biggest budget usually got the biggest customer base? Those days are gone. Forever."

Well, first, I never recommend writing copy that opens with a rhetorical question. Because it might not be rhetorical to your target customer, and once they answer no, you've lost them. And in this case, I answer 'no'. As in, "No, I don't remember when marketers with the biggest budget usually got the biggest customer base. And neither does anyone who started practicing advertising and marketing at any point following the Johnson administration."

Second, um, huh? This is compelling copy? Do they think I - or any marketer who has reached a point in their career where they are a decisionmaker - or even an influencer regarding such software - was actually sitting at their desk, thinking, "Geez, if only I could spend more on a wildly chaotic, unstructured campaign that lacks any sense of accountability, like the guys on Mad Men"?

"What despair. I guess we'll just be second rate until I can get more money from the CFO."

Not so much.

Here's what's wrong with marketing today: Even a marketing-centric company can't piece together decent marketing copy, relying instead on empty platitudes, because they don't understand that their target audience is far more sophisticated than they give them (us) credit for.

What might be worse: Perhaps marketers still aren't all that sophisticated, and this company's copy is more on-target than even I want to admit.

How much green is there in green?

In a recent price sensitivity analysis conducted by Rockbridge Research, it was discovered that most consumers would purchase a product indicated as 'green' (environmentally friendly) over a 'regular' product of the same type, but only if they were the same price. The study concluded that overall, "...as the green product’s price increases, consumers’ inclination towards it decreases."

Not surprisingly, specific audience categories offering unique attitudes toward the 'green movement' differ in the value they place on such products. Six distinct consumer groups within the overall adult consumer population were identified, with “Green Tech Leaders” willing to pay far more for a green certified product, while “Anti-Greens” are not willing to pay much more at all. That alone is interesting as it still indicates a willingness to perhaps consider the positive social implications of buying green even to those who do not value it themselves. This indicates that green product attributes are valuable, but not widespread enough to accommodate anything but a modest price adjustment.

From a share prospective, a green alternative may move the needle. From a margin perspective, this study indicates that their isn't yet much green in being green.

To learn more about Rockbridge’s Green Technology Segmentation, click here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Nearly all "Eco" Product Claims Are Misleading [Greenwashing] (consumerist.com)

Nowhere to hide

So we found out this week that the Texas Rangers' Josh Hamilton fell off the wagon last January. And from the photos (note there is no link attached to that word, at least from this blog - I'll get to that in a moment) he landed hard. The married Hamilton, offered a second chance at baseball after falling into drugs while a young ballplayer convalescing an injury, was photographed drinking, carousing, and essentially behaving like a fratboy at his first kegger. Unfortunate, but not unexpected. Experts say relapses in recovery are common. Fortunately for Hamilton, he told his family and team the very next day so this story is old news now, some eight months later - at least to those who matter.

Olympic phenom Michael Phelps was photographed months ago taking a bong hit at a college party. (I blogged on the topic here.) He lost some major endorsements, apologized, and hopefully learned an important lesson. Whether that lesson is "Just Say No" or "make sure you can trust the people you party with" is unknown, but truth is, both are valid lessons.

I'm not linking to or reposting any of these related images, and I'm not going to comment with some false air of indignation about the behavior of these athletes. I actually tend to take the position of SNL comic Seth Meyer in this outstanding SNL rant. ("If you're at a party and you see Michael Phelps smoking a bong and your first thought isn't "Wow, I get to party with Michael Phelps" and instead you take a picture and sell it to a tabloid, you should take a long look in the mirror...") It isn't in my nature to build people up just for the thrill of tearing them down - as if accomplished, public people were nothing more wooden blocks stacked by some sugar-ravaged five year old. In my experience, most tend to punish themselves just fine on their own.

My marketing mind however pauses and recognizes that each of us, our companies, and our values are subject to the whims of small minded people and rabid opponents who are using the tools of the Internet and social media to gain even the most morally tenuous ground or simply force their way onto the 15 minute stage with a sensational bit of useless gossip. Therefore, it is critical that people and organizations not ignore these new communication tools, but engage them to monitor and proactively defend their brand - whether corporate, product, or personal. As social media consultant Shama Kabani stated in a recent presentation to CEO Netweavers, "...whether or not you want (photos and personal information) out there, its out there. The point is to build up a credible persona in person and online to counter any negative consequence."

Fortunately for Hamilton and Phelps, they've handled their scandals well, offering quick acknowledgment and heartfelt apologies. In the end, the best revenge is their stellar athletic performances since. In the few days since the Hamilton story became public, he's been hitting .360, and for his part, last week Phelps once again set a new world record, this time in the 100m fly. Sometimes the best response is continue to do what you do best.

Or in other words, in a world where all the hiding places are mic'd, let the world know that you are still trying to be the people our dogs think we are.

The Hype Cycle

Although an awesome marketing name for a chrome and flame-painted chopper, the hype cycle is not a creation of Orange County Choppers, but rather a term of the Gartner Group research firm and refers to their interpretation of the development, maturity, and adoption of technology.

You know, the path between 'slideware' (unproven ideas that only exist in PowerPoint slides) and 'general availability' (store shelves).

Speech recognition is one of these technologies. In 2000, they were admittedly my slides suggesting that a speech platform was 'around the corner'. In 2003, when they were Microsoft's slides (with the introduction of their speech server) and again now, these slides are re-issued with a Google logo.

I know a lot of earnest people in the field of speech recognition and I know they spend a great deal of time refining and improving speech recognition capabilities in myriad applications. In this article, you'd think that a decade of inprovements, trial and error, and frankly, millions of VC dollars hadn't already been expended when Larry Page and Sergey Brin decended from the heavens, touched the complicated technology, and made speech 'finally viable' with Google Voice.

Speech technology is already a viable (and functioning) technology. But I also understand that there is a required ecosystem of hardware, software and services in speech technology to make it 'work' as a fully-functional platform of the future, in spite of the hype that accompanies a Google launch of anything from a phone OS to breadsticks. ("Peak of inflated expectations" in graph.)

It is a gentle reminder as product marketers, we understand that it is as important to build expectation and excitement at a launch as it is to control those expectations. The marketplace doesn't allow marketers to underperform to their promises, a lesson we knew but were (supposedly) reminded of with the Internet bubble. As this article points out, and Microsoft discovered, speech is a human construct that requires a great deal more than money and technologists - even Google money and Google technologists - to make it meet the long-held expectations we have held for speech as an interface in the near term, and to overcome the long-held cynicism that a future feature-rich, reliable 'speech-driven platform of the future' will now have to overcome to establish a marketplace. Speech has sat at the peak of inflated expectations long enough. It desrves to grow, but only if allowed to drop into Gartner's "trough of disillusionment" first (graph).

To be certain, speech will drive a viable comprehensive OS platform one day. Just not this Thursday. Or next.