Wednesday, 23 December 2009

What Sucks? Challenging your Website Visitors To Maximize Engagement

Over at Merlin Mann's 43 Folders website - he has a great page called simply called HowTo: (http://www.43folders.com/howto) whose purpose is to challenge its visitors by asking why they have visited his site today. The subtext being to help you A) decide if you really needed to visit this site; B) what do you actually want, no really, what do you want!

The tone of voice used is that of an impatient, ever-so-important, person who immediately wants to know if you are serious or not; a straight-talking, no bull, cut-to-the-chase kind of person. Allow me to give you an example, the website opens with a very bold statement to frame the page's intent: [this page is]  "A very simple guide to leaving here quickly so you can get back to making something awesome."

This almost irked me, but it didn't, because as I scanned down the page I was presented with a question: What Sucks? This question made me stop, in my tracks, and really think before progressing. This put me in the right frame of mind to 

This is just brilliant, he is really asking ME what sucks today, with the promise of answers - I was hooked - and now I am thinking how we can adopt this and by using our own tone of use this for our own website and those of our clients. 

Thing about it how could you pose a simple question, with a personal set of possible answers that relates to your business, brand, service... Could, In fact, you the what sucks question? Here is my initial thinking for i-KOS's (a digital agency) under the banner 'What Sucks?' to thus direct views to the "answer"

  • My website sucks
  • My CMS sucks
  • My marketing sucks
  • My SEO sucks
  • My branding sucks
  • My colleagues really suck and we need new ideas fast
  • My e-mail marketing is non-existent and this sucks
  • My understanding of analytics sucks
  • Our PPC campaign sucks so much we concluded it doesn't work 

As you could tell I started getting into this towards the end of the list. Anyhow I will update this post as we develop this kernel of an idea and inspiration into our own website which we hope inspires others. 

You should follow Myles on Twitter (www.twitter.com/mylesdavidson) to carry on the conversation and you can add to this blog by posting comments, asking questions or challenging my thinking. 

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Tuesday, 22 December 2009

Top Ten Techie Things I liked in 2009

This being the season for Top Ten's 

  1. Drupal
  2. Tweetdeck
  3. Posterous
  4. Audioboo 
  5. Dropbox
  6. Mag.ma
  7. Prezzi
  8. Ustream 
  9. Tumblr
  10. Tweetie2 


Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Sunday, 13 December 2009

Does the fact that your tweets get indexed by Google make you think twice before tweeting?

Listen!

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Does the fact that your tweets get indexed by Google make you think twice before tweeting?

Vote now:



Context:

Last week, Google rolled out real time search integrated into its main results. It’s a dynamic, scrolling display of the latest tweets and other content that matches what you’re searching for.

Google search results that are scrolling? Think about that. Four years ago, Google quite famously said there would be no “crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up all over the Google site. Ever.” I don’t know about you, but a dynamic scrolling box of results is pretty flashy and graphical to me.

Fast-forward 12 years to today, and if I want a top ranking on Google for 'anything', it’s easy. I just tweet something about it and moments later, It's there. 

Now consider you are thinking about employing someone (we all know the troubles peoples Facebook profile have caused) I think it likely you might checkout their Linked-in profile and Google them too.

Here is the results on Google when searching on my name (purely for researching this post; not for vanity reasons you understand); as it happens these last two tweets are quotes from or links to a topic I am interested in and not likely to offend anyone. However because Twitter is so fast and informal people tend to tweet a blend of information, links ('informer') or stuff about themselves ('meformer') as indeed I do. This results screen could have just as easily reveled how I was feeling, sitting in a kids party with a hundred screaming kids, after a rather heavy night out.

It was this very tweet that made me stop, for a second, before hitting the send button. This small hesitation has, at some level, shifted my thinking about my Twitter use. 

Further reading on the Pros & Cons Of Real Time Integration can be read in this considered article: http://searchengineland.com/search-real-time-madness-31668

Please do share or comment and if you are not doing so already why not follow me @mylesdavidson

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Tuesday, 8 December 2009

WIN A NEW LIFE - Dude gives away £1.1 million house (Video)

As many of you know we (i-KOS) built the website and the Flash game that allows people to take a £20 punt and try to win his £1.1million pound sales. The competition for only another few days (closes on the 15th December) and following the celebrity bash last have produced this viral video.

I've gotten to know Andrew really well these past few months and I really hope the competition finishes with a flurry.

Please do watch and pass on - who knows someone I know might WIN (as I cannot enter - dooogh)

Best

Myles

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Sunday, 6 December 2009

Five fast email productivity tips - Help I am drowning in a sea of communication

There’s been a lot of great discussions about email productivity going around on sites I enjoy, so I thought I’d throw in five no-brainers that I’ve seen help a lot of folks.

  1. Shut off auto-check - Either turn off automatic checking completely, or set it to something reasonable, like every 20 minutes or so. If you’re doing anything with new email more than every few minutes, you might want to rethink your approach. I’m sure that some of you working in North Korean missile silos need real-time email updates, but I encourage the rest of you to consider ganging your email activity into focused (maybe even timed) activity every hour or three. Process, tag, respond to the urgent ones, then get the hell back to work. (See also, NYT: You There, at the Computer: Pay Attention)
  2. Pick off easy ones - If you can retire an email with a 1-2 line response (< 2 minutes; pref. 30 seconds), do it now. Remember: this is about action, not about cogitating and filing. Get it off your plate, and get back to work. On the other hand, don’t permit yourself to get caught up in composing an unnecessary 45-minute epistle (see next item).
  3. Write less - Stop imagining that all your emails need to be epic literature; get better at just keeping the conversation moving by responding quickly and with short actions in the reply. Ask for more information, pose a question, or just say “I don’t know.” Stop trying to be Victor Hugo Marcel Proust, and just smack it over the net—especially if fear of writing a long reply is what slows your response time. N.B.: This does not mean that you should write elliptically or bypass standard grammar, capitalization, and punctuation (unless you want to look 12 years old); just that your well-written message can and should be as concise as possible. That saves everyone time.
  4. Cheat - Use something like MailTemplate to help manage answers to frequent email subjects. Templates let you create and use boilerplate responses to the questions and requests to which you usually find yourself drafting identical replies over and over from scratch. At least use a template as a basis for your response, and then customize it for that person or situation. Don’t worry—you can still let your sparkling prose and winning wit shine through, just without having to invent the wheel 10 times each day.
  5. Be honest - If you know in your heart that you’re never going to respond to an email, get it out of sight, archive it, or just delete it. Guilt will not make you more responsive two months from now, otherwise, you’d just do it now, right? Trust your instincts, listen to them, and stop trying to be perfect.

Update 2005-10-18 07:33:45

Yep, you read it right: in the eightish months since I posted this, I’ve set my email to check every hour. The result? I ain’t missing much. A lot of stuff that can wait, a lot that resolves itself, and a huge mass of items that previously would have sent me on a 50-yard-dash to nothing.

Friends: stop letting your email poke you with a stick. It’s just not worth it.

I think it is time to admit that I have a massive problem with my e-mail. At the time of writing there are 9062 messages in my inbox.

OK so that last time I manually archived my INBOX was almost a year ago; but considering I delete more e-mails than not, and have folders and rules to manage others - means that I probably receive as many as 2000 e-mails per month; 500 per week and almost 100 per day.

Firstly I reckon there are only 20 e-mails per 5 working days that are meaningful (need a response or action) - the rest a combination of junk, and stuff I am cc'd in on.

So today, Sunday, I decided to revisit Merlin Mann's website 43 signals - who has lots of advice for e-mail junkies who, like me, seek out his advice to try and solve e-mail overload.

I am writing this post to publicly state that 'I Myles Davidson, have a problem; I am addicted to my e-mail'. There I've said it - phew... I really do feel better.

So as with all self-help programs I must take the first step. To this end I have just changed my auto-check to ONE HOUR. This itself, I kid you not, almost turned me into a quivering wreck. It was set, probably by default, to 5 minutes. The temptation was to go for 15 or 30 minutes but I figure I should go for an hour.

I will let you know how this turns unfolds and now I am going to start deleting (ok archiving) about 9000 e-mails. I know for some, in box 'zero' is the mantra and may this is what I secretly desire but one step at a time, right?

Please do let me know your suggestions of help, and do follow my progress via twitter (@mylesdavidson)

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Thursday, 26 November 2009

Are You an In or an Out Leader?

I have just spent an intensive week coaching executives in a global organisation, asking my clients the simple question: are you an "In" or an "Out" leader?

By that, I mean, how much time and energy are you spending in (or with) your team and how much time out in the wider organisation? It might seem like a simple question, but executives rarely take the time to think about it. It's important to do though, because this single question could answer many other questions that you — or your boss — have about your style and effectiveness.

Executives usually have a preference for one arena, which can be reinforced by their role, their personality, or even the corporate culture. A quality control manager, for example, would naturally be more inwardly focused while a communications director would roam across the business. Both roles would attract different personalities. Similarly, some organisations are structured as, or have developed into, silos due to the nature of their business or markets. Examples might include law firms, where separate practices evolve to serve clients in specific areas.

My suggestion is that executives need to balance the time they spend in both the In and Out arenas if they are to be effective. They also need to find a third place — between the two arenas — where they can reflect on this. My post earlier this year about scheduling a regular meeting with yourself is one way to do this.

Let me outline some of the activities and tasks associated with each arena so you can assess for yourself where you are spending your time:

In Leaders:

  • Focus on results and deliverables
  • Coach and support their people
  • Build team spirit
  • Offer expert knowledge or share experience
  • Monitor performance/quality control
  • Are present and available
  • Surface and deal with conflict

Out Leaders:

  • Get involved in cross-organisational initiatives
  • Build networks
  • Delegate extensively
  • Manage their profiles and visibility
  • Engage with peers inside and outside their companies
  • Look after their careers
  • Engage in organisational politics
  • Join committees
  • Attend or speak at industry conferences

So why is balance so important? I have worked with many executives who exist only in the In space. They argue that they are doing "real" work: finishing projects, delivering results and building strong teams. They often distrust (or even despise) peers who focus on the Out space, branding them as attention seekers, political operators, or "committee people." Not surprisingly, the outwardly focused leaders describe their inward-facing peers as uncooperative, naïve, or poor corporate citizens.

Of course, I am describing extremes of behaviour here, but I hope you see my point. The best approach is to know your default setting and then to make sure that it is not turning into your comfort zone. All of the positive aspects of each point above can turn into negatives if they are overplayed. So focusing too much on results can mean you neglect strategy and vision, and always being on hand with an answer for your team can mean they become lazy or de-motivated. Equally, too many cross-organisational initiatives can detract from your real job, while looking after yourself and your career alone can mean you lose supporters.

One client I remember received some very clear feedback about where he should be focusing his energy. An individualistic and politically savvy North American executive, he had been posted to Switzerland, where his team were unimpressed by what they viewed as his selfish and pointless manoeuvrings across the organisation. "Come back into your team where you belong," they demanded. He recognised that Swiss culture is based on team work and the leader's role is more primus inter pares than boss. Fortunately he adapted his style and focused heavily inwards, spending time building relationships and supporting his team. Interestingly, when I caught up with him three years later, the feedback he was receiving was the opposite: "You are here too much," they said. "You have disappeared as a leader. We need you to go out and fight for us. Be our North star." Clearly, it was time for him to venture outwards again.

As always, I am eager to hear your thoughts and comments. Do you prefer one arena or the other? Have you been pushed outside your comfort zone or area of responsibility? Have you noticed any preferences among colleagues or bosses to be In or Out? What do you think is a good balance of activity?

People who read this also read:

* * *
Never miss a new post from your favorite blogger again with the HarvardBusiness.org Daily Alert email. The Alert delivers the latest blog posts from HarvardBusiness.org and HBR.org directly to your inbox every morning at 8:00 AM ET.

Excellent question - I am 50:50 - what are?

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Microsoft opens a new front in its battle with Google

Web-wide war

Nov 25th 2009
From Economist.com

Microsoft opens a new front in its battle with Google


Shutterstock

EVEN technology pundits can sometimes be right. Jason Calacanis, an entrepreneur and noted agent provocateur, recently argued that there is a simple solution to the woes of both Microsoft and big media companies. The world’s largest software firm should pay Time Warner, News Corporation and others firms to block Google, the search giant, from indexing their content—and make it searchable exclusively through Bing, Microsoft’s new search service. Media companies would thus get badly needed cash and Bing a chance to gain market share from Google.

This week it emerged that Microsoft and News Corp are talking about just that. Although the discussions may come to naught, or prove a mere ploy in the media firm’s ongoing negotiations with Google, the news caused a stir. It is a sign not only of how far Microsoft is willing to go in order to turn Bing into a serious rival to Google, but also of how the entire internet could well evolve.

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Interview with Ian Sheppard, editor, Regional International. Discussing Digital Curation.

Listen!

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Thursday, 19 November 2009

Purcell Miller Tritton | UK Historic Architects | Goes Live on #Drupal Platform | Designed and Built by i-KOS - Please comment

Purcell Miller Tritton is a leading architectural practice with a reputation for excellence established by 60 years of work on many of the UK’s best-loved buildings and places - which is nice.

Even better they selected i-KOS (www.i-kos.com) to redesign their website and in doing so we got to build it on our own Skeleton Version of Drupal - more about this soon (promise).

Please do have a look and I know the team at i-KOS and Purcell would love your comments. 

Thank you 

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Saturday, 14 November 2009

The Illusion of Brand Control

starHarvardBusiness.org
13 November 2009 14:00
by Andrew McAfee

The Illusion of Brand Control

You've probably heard by now that "your brand is no longer yours." The assertion's based on simple math. In the era of blogs, discussion boards, Facebook, Twitter, and other Web 2.0 tools, virtually everyone can get online and talk about your company and its offerings. As a result, the amount of information your marketing and PR departments can generate is only a small percentage of the total volume of content on the Internet about your firm.

What's more, if some of the external voices become as popular, or perish the thought, more popular than your official voice, then they're going to show up high in organic (as opposed to paid) search results. For example, I just typed "Hummer" into Google. The second result is the Wikipedia entry about the vehicle, and the fourth one is a site full of user-submitted photos that are not likely to please the brand's owner.

Every large organization I'm aware of is highly sensitive about its brand, and few are happy about losing or even sharing control over it. They react to the reality of Web 2.0 era in many ways, but most of them amount to some form of trying to exert or reestablish control. Some move their mass media campaigns online to counteract the outside conversation. Some try to influence the influential external voices. Many companies monitor the new online conversations, and also participate in them by setting up official Facebook fan pages, Twitter accounts, and so on. More than a few try "sock puppeting" or having someone on the payroll pose as an outsider with nothing but good things to say. This rarely works; Web users are reasonably good at sniffing out inauthentic voices and ignoring or blowing the whistle on them.

A few large, brand-sensitive organizations have taken another approach; they've accepted their lack of brand control and have actively encouraged insiders to join the online conversation without making any attempt to censor or even guide them. They've said, essentially, "You know us really well. Talk about us on the Web. We want the world to hear what you have to say."

Does that sound risky to you? Can you envision dozens of ways in which that approach can go horribly wrong? Me, too. And yet, I keep reading stories like the recent one in the New York Times about MIT's student bloggers, and they make me appreciate the brilliance of this approach.

Five years ago Ben Jones, then the director of communications in MIT's admissions office, added a single student blog to the office's web page; there are now eleven of them. Student bloggers are selected after submitting writing samples, and are paid $10 per hour.

I was an undergrad at MIT (just a few years before the blog era) and I assure you that most students there would treat the administration's suggestions about appropriate self-expression about the same way Roger Federer might treat the local club pro's tips on improving his forehand. The admissions office understands this, and wisely doesn't try to edit posts or comments.

And not all content reflects glowingly on the institution. One blogger complained about problems with the resident advising system, while another wrote that she's felt several times that she didn't fit in at MIT. She also went on to say, as the Times story reports, that "MIT is the closest you can get to living on the Internet...IT IS SO TRUE. Love. It. So. Much."

MIT could spend lots of money on their brand and image and never come up with a better advertising tag line than "The closest you can get to living on the Internet." Indeed, part of what makes it so effective is not just its clarity and cleverness, but the fact that it's being shouted across the Internet by a current student who is clearly speaking in her own voice. It's just tremendous marketing; the admissions office couldn't ask for, or pay for better.

Putting student blogs front and center is a mark of MIT's confidence: confidence in itself as a healthy organization where the pros outweigh the cons, confidence in the members of its community who represent it to the world, and confidence that the people who come to its website will know how to interpret the information they find there. According to the Times article, potential applicants to the university are "less interested in official messages and statistics than in first-hand narratives and direct interaction with current students." Does that sound at all like your customers?

Is your organization as confident as MIT? Are you ready and willing to let more internal voices communicate and shape your brand over time? If not, why not? Is it that you don't trust your people, or your customers? Is it that you don't want any negativity at all to appear on your digital properties? Or is it that you're afraid there might be too much negativity?

I don't think these are unfair questions, or trivial ones. Their answers will reveal not only how your organization sees itself, but also about how it's responding to a world of reduced control over brands, conversations, and messages. Leading organizations are embracing this trend and, like MIT, they're giving up tight control even when and where they don't have to.

Lagging organizations are holding on to the illusion that tight control is still possible.
Branding Marketing Social media

Sent from my iPhone

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

The 7 Harsh Realities of Social Media Marketing

starCopyblogger
13 November 2009 14:51
by Sonia Simone

The 7 Harsh Realities of Social Media Marketing

image of boxer taking a punch

Last Friday I was in Atlanta, where I gave a talk on social media marketing at Dan Kennedy’s InfoSUMMIT conference.

I’m something of a fish out of water at a Glazer-Kennedy event. For example, unlike at Blogworld, I’m the only person in a room of 800 who has pink hair.

I wasn’t sure they’d be too receptive to what I had to say, but they surprised me.

They were warm, welcoming, and extremely interested in my no-shortcuts, no-magic-beans answers to their questions about how to use social media for marketing and business.

So in honor of Dan Kennedy, who sometimes styles himself as the “Professor of Harsh Reality,” I thought I’d talk today about some of the not-so-kumbaya aspects of social media marketing.

Harsh Reality #1: No one is reading your blog

As far as anyone can figure, there are about 200 million blogs around the world. Technorati tells us there are about 900,000 blog posts made every 24 hours.

The world is not waiting breathlessly to hear what you have to say about losing weight with acai berries, making big money as an affiliate marketer, or how to join your Secrets of the Breakthrough Millionaire Insider Guru Mastermind Platinum Club.

Me-too content gets ignored. Scraped and remixed junk won’t cut it. There’s too much good content that you need to compete with. And there’s no magic system that can replace sitting in front of your keyboard and producing something that somebody wants to read. (Or partnering with someone who can.)

If you don’t have a great answer to the question “Why should anyone read your blog?” you’re going to be pretty unhappy with your results. That’s why we spend so much time teaching you how to produce better, smarter, more effective content.

Harsh Reality #2: You’ve got to give (some of) your best stuff away

It’s very natural to expect to get paid for what you do. And you should have a business model that leads to exactly that.

But first, you’ve got some dues to pay.

Commenter Corree Silvera mentioned her favorite Brian Clark quote from this year’s Blogworld Expo:

Don’t sacrifice a lot of money later for a little money now.

The answer to the question in Harsh Reality #1, “why should anyone read your blog?” is that you’re going to give away some of your best, most valuable, most life-improving material away for free, within a well-defined content marketing plan.

Just remember Sean d’Souza’s bikini concept. You can give 90% of it away, but there will always be people who will happily pay to see that last 10%.

Harsh Reality #3: It will eat your life (if you let it)

Social media marketing would be pretty easy if we never had to eat, sleep, shower, or hang out with our kids.

But if doing those things is important to you, you’re going to have to set some boundaries.

Know what you want to do with social media, keep yourself focused, and set a timer if you have to. The tools are amazing, but so is their power to distract you from what you’re trying to accomplish.

Harsh Reality #4: Social media hates selling

Is there anything more pitiful than that guy who gets on Twitter and won’t shut up about how he can put you in a condo today with no money down despite your lousy credit rating? Even the spammers are blocking this dude.

It’s really hard to sell products and services in social media, mostly because this audience hates salespeople worse than they hate Microsoft. You may be able to get some limited success out of it, but more likely you’ll be banned, blocked, shunned, and abused.

Instead of promoting a product or service, promote fantastic content. Promote a great special report or an amazingly valuable email course. Promote wonderful stuff that you’re giving away.

Use excellent free stuff to build authority and trust. Then you have the right to make an offer and possibly do some business. Not before.

Harsh Reality #5: What they say is a million times more important than what you say

Your marketing might be beautifully executed. You might have a special report that goes more viral than H1N1, a great-looking blog that hits Digg twice a day, and an email marketing sequence that copywriting genius Gene Schwartz would have been proud to write.

If your reputation sucks, none of it matters.

People with lousy products, crummy business practices, and shady backgrounds get found out. And word spreads with frightening speed.

Treat people right, because if you don’t, you will be exposed. And it will not be pretty.

Harsh Reality #6: A blog is not a marketing plan

Blogs are cool, but a single useful tool isn’t the same thing as a solid business and marketing plan.

Blogs are just one way to get your best content out there, and they work best when you pair them up with email autoresponders, special reports, Twitter, and any of a dozen other powerful tools.

Just hanging out and being cool isn’t enough. If you’re in social media to do business, you have to develop a strategy for taking mildly interested strangers and turning them into raving fans . . . and customers.

Harsh Reality #7: You don’t get to opt out

Businesses that think they can ignore all this “Twitter stupidity” tend to get painfully rude awakenings.

The conversation will happen with or without you. You definitely don’t need to respond to every chucklehead with a Facebook account (and you shouldn’t), but you need to keep your ear to the ground, and you need a clue.

OK, enough about harsh reality already! If you want our best advice about what to do to create a great online business, subscribe to Internet Marketing for Smart People, the Copyblogger email newsletter. It’s some of our best stuff, no junk, no fluff. And of course we will never, ever spam you or share your information with anyone.

About the Author: Sonia Simone is Senior Editor of Copyblogger and the founder of Remarkable Communication

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Thursday, 12 November 2009

Grab your free copy of LittleSnapper for iPhone!

image image image image image image
image image image
image

Grab your Free copy of LittleSnapper for iPhone

As many of your are aware, we've had a companion iPhone application for LittleSnapper available on the App Store for some time, costing just $2.99. Today however, we've decided to make the application freely available for a limited time!

LittleSnapper for iPhone allows you easily capture webpages, use your device's built-in camera or upload an existing image from your Camera Roll to our Ember inspiration sharing service. If you don't have an Ember account, you can create a free account right inside the application and get uploading.

LittleSnapper 1.5 preview

To grab your free copy of LittleSnapper for iPhone, simply visit the App Store - and to see the application in action, be sure to check out the LittleSnapper for iPhone product page.

Save $5 on LittleSnapper for Mac and Ember Pro!

If you don't yet own a copy of LittleSnapper for Mac, or want to upgrade your free Ember account to an Ember Pro subscription, then now might be a good time to go Pro! Until the end of November, you can save $5 on LittleSnapper licences or an Ember Pro account simply by using the coupon code HAPPYSNAPPYNOV. To take advantage of this coupon either visit the Realmac Store or visit the Ember Upgrade page before the end of the month.

That's all for now!

We'll be in touch with more news soon, but if you want to know all the latest on any of our products be sure to follow their respective Twitter feeds. Check out @RapidWeaver @LittleSnapper @EmberApp and of course @RealmacSoftware!

image
image
image

Copyright 2009 Realmac Software Limited. Purchase RapidWeaver and LittleSnapper from our online store.

We know you don't like to receive tonnes of promotional mail, so if you'd rather not hear from us again, just click here and you'll be instantly unsubscribed.

Powered by Mad Mimi

Go grab yours now:

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Tuesday, 13 October 2009

Cheat at golf, cheat at work | Marketplace From American Public Media

  • Dan Ariely

    Dan Ariely

TEXT OF INTERVIEW

Kai Ryssdal: Here's a quick news item by way of introduction to our next story. New York City has a law that says restaurants have to post the calorie content for each item on their menus -- on the theory that that'll encourage people to order healthier meals. Research out today shows that theory has some flaws in it. Like, people don't actually make better choices. Even with the calorie count posted, diners picked meals that were worse for them. Little white lies to ourselves to make it easier to order the Big Mac, I suppose.

Behavioral economist Dan Ariely is back talking about a different set of white lies and what they might say about the way we do business. Dan, good to have you here again.

DAN ARIELY: Nice to be here.

Ryssdal: I hate to say this, but we're back to one of your favorite subjects: cheating.

ARIELY: Well, you don't need to call it my favorite topic, but it definitely is something I'm interested in.

Ryssdal: Well, all right, well, do tell here. You've got golf and cheating. Is that the score?

ARIELY: I thought about golf and cheating because it looked to me like golf is something that actually could teach us something about the business world. And think about it. Golf is a team effort. I mean, you play with other people, but it's also an individual endeavor. Everybody basically gets to control themselves and decide what rules to follow and what rules not to follow. And golf, much like accounting and other things, have lots and lots of rules. So I was curious about what people cheat in golf, and how much they cheat.

Ryssdal: All right, first let me preface this by saying we will get e-mails from many, many golfers who say the joy and the glory of that sport is that golfers follow the rules. They are honorable law-abiding people who never, ever cheat, and that's the principle of the game.

ARIELY: Uh, yes...

Ryssdal: I'm just saying.

ARIELY: I'm sure you'll get calls like this. But nevertheless we got a golf company to help us out, and they sent e-mails to their users. And we got about 17,000 people to respond. And first of all, as you would expect, they admitted to cheat less than they thought other people cheat. It was curious to see different the patterns of cheating. So first of all there's something called a mulligan. And a mulligan is the idea that you hit the first shot, and it doesn't work very well, and you get a do-over, as the kids say, right? You start again. And what's interesting is that people feel very good about taking a mulligan on the first hole of the day; they don't feel very good about taking it on the ninth hole. Another interesting thing that we find is that people have a relatively easy time writing on their scorecard a different number than the number of strokes they really took.

Ryssdal: Yeah, because nobody is watching, right?

ARIELY: But once they write these numbers down, they have a harder time adding it up wrongly.

Ryssdal: Right, right. It's easier to cheat in the moment then?

ARIELY: It's easier to cheat in the moment, and it's easier to cheat when there's like no traces for this cheating.

Ryssdal: These 17,000 people, Dan, did they list occupation when they responded to this survey? Do we know how the accountants did, and how the doctors did?

ARIELY: We do know how they did. First of all, it turns out that people in the pharmaceutical industry cheated a lot, but they also said their industry is the most honest that there is. There are some other interesting comparisons. For example, if you look at law enforcement, education and government, people in those three industries basically cheat on average, as do people in sales, marketing, advertising and so on. But the people in law enforcement, education and government think that they're the most honest, while the people in sales and marketing and advertising cheat just the same but they think they come from industries that are much less honest.

Ryssdal: Bring this back to the workplace for me then. What does this tell us about the way things get done in this country, and how we actually do and manage our economy?

ARIELY: First of all, I think cheating in golf is kind of a good example for how we think about day-to-day tasks. The fact that people can take a mulligan or how they can cheat on golf, I think tells us that's there a lot of corner bending that we see in the business world. And what I worry about is that once we start in this path of immorality, even with small bending of rules and cutting corners here and there, that this tendency could become bigger and bigger and really a part of the collective understanding of how business is actually done.

Ryssdal: Dan Ariely teaches behavioral economics at Duke University. His book is called "Predictably Irrational." Dan, thanks a lot.

ARIELY: My pleasure.

Ryssdal: Hey Dan, wait, before I let you go. Who is the most honest? Do we know that?

ARIELY: Well, the most honest quite surprisingly were the people from the insurance industry.

Ryssdal: Really?

ARIELY: Could you believe it? Yeah, they cheated...it turns that they thought they were not particularly honest as an industry, but in our sample they cheated the least.

Ryssdal: So what does that tell you?

ARIELY: Well, it does tell me I'm having a renewed belief in my insurance agent right now. Or maybe it tells us that the people who from AIG have left the market are not playing golf right now.

Ryssdal: Oh man. Oh my goodness.

ARIELY: That's cruel.

I love the book 'Predictably Irrational' by Dan Ariely; and in if the truth be known I love Golf even more - so when the two merged I had to read.

Apparently insurance folk are the most honest in Golf and those in Marketing and Sales cheat an average amount. Go figure!

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Wednesday, 16 September 2009

Voucher codes. An ecommerce Imperative

Listen!

Posted via web from mylesdavidson's posterous

Discount Vouchers - a must for B2C website - an eCommerce imperative

Come on admit it, if you get to a checkout and you see a 'redeem voucher' box, the very next thing you do, is search for a valid voucher.  I do and in the very recent past, spent more time looking for a voucher than I did researching and finding the product. And here's the skinny; when you find a working voucher you find yourself proclaiming 'I'm In' as though you are a black-hat hacker who has just gotten into a grade a military network! Or is that just me?

Well based on the following statistic, i seems as though, I am not alone -phew

In the UK, searches for "discount vouchers" grew by 94% between November and December 2008.

Google Insights for Search

If you are a freelancer or agency you owe it to your clients to let them know this statistic; and add a discount voucher scheme to their eCommerce process. Of course you could take the view that this dilutes the cost per sale, but as i have blogged about before - its all there for the testing. My punt is it will increase sales especially if you get your voucher well publicised. 

As ever all comments welcome and for more thoughts you should follow me on Twitter 

p.s. UPDATE - having drafting this and sharing it with ourclients first a number of them have already said yes and within the last couple of days www.winanewlife.com have added a 3 for 1 ticket deal - Voucher Code 3for1

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Monday, 24 August 2009

The agency / client conundrum - what would you do?

Part One - The conundrum (18th August 2009)

Let me set the scene (fellow agencies and freelancers might recognise all or some of this story)

You've built a good website for your client and they're happy hurrah! You get paid - you're happy. You then move into the marketing phase; SEO is a difficult pitch (at this stage) so you opt for a PPC campaign with Google. A test budget of £1000 is agreed and you do your job well; setup conversion tracking, do your research and manage the spend diligently. In fact you've done your job well enough for the client to double the spend for the next month - so far so good.

But, and here's the conundrum, because you manage a number of similar accounts you are not happy with a 1.79% click to conversion. The truth is you think this is just the early stages and you heartily recommend they invest in additional design time allowing you to develop a landing page with the goal to increase conversion. [Secretly you want to go all out and start A>B testing and in the back of your mind you are yearning to get into multivariate testing]

It is at this point that, for the first time, you do not have a meeting of minds. The client wants you to manage the increased spend but does not buy into the additional costs to develop a landing page?

At this point I would love to know - What you would do?

Please take 5 seconds to cast your vote: http://twtpoll.com/pjl17x

This was a scenario we (i-KOS) faced in July 2009 - I will share exactly what we did in a follow-up post in one week; along with the results from the poll.

Part 2 - The result - (24th August 2009)

The results can also be viewed here: http://twtpoll.com/r/pjl17x

So what did we do? Well we opted for:

D) Suggest a cost per sale deal for increased sale

Confident that we could up the sales from little more than a landing page we proposed a £15 per sale for all sales made above and beyond a 1.79% conversion rate on the proviso that a £2K budget was spent. The result an extra 60 sales were generated - as the conversion was up by 24.8%

Commission earned £900 - client happy - agency happy. A real win-win!

Want to know more?

You can follow my riffs, and ramblings on running an agency @mylesdavidson (http://www.twitter.com/mylesdavidson) and if you are seeking an agency who just might back their ideas then speak to me at i-KOS 01322 277255

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Friday, 21 August 2009

Graze - a lesson in branding - is there anything they don't do well?

Building a brand to stand out from the crowd takes a real commitment from a business leader or manager with both the vision to see the value of building a brand and the tenacity to instill it throughout every fibre of the company. 

Too often, as an agency, we are called on to redesign a brand to a stipulated brief that asks us to evaluate an existing logo. The normal driver for this is perhaps that the brand looks tired or, over-time has become disjointed. 

In this era a brand has to encompass far more than just a logo, and how it looks across various media. One must consider how the brand will communicate and interact. 

To this end I hold up Graze as lesson to us all. Since I was first told about them (thanks to @simonsurtees) I was impressed; a visit to their website had me hooked - I ordered on my first visit. The order process was a pleasure; I actually got better informed and more excited as I went through the process. 

The follow-up e-mail was just great; the tone of voice was friendly, informative and caring. The day before my first food parcel (ed - box) was to arrive I got an e-mail letting me know it was on its way and what was in it. Thursday arrived and this wonderful little box appeared, opened up three trays were neatly displayed with fresh cut pineapple, apple strudel, and black pepper cashews. It tasted as good as its presentation suggested. With little wastage in packaging there was one insert - letting me know exactly what was in the box - oh and some personalized coupons offering friends a box for £1. 

Currently I have left my order open so that I get one box a week and the nuts and seeds always get shared out. Should I be out the office when a box arrives @twittlelegs normally swipes them! Although @dereckjohnson likes to nibble the nuts!

What happens next is a really nice 'feed a friend' promotion offering anyone I care to share with - a FREE box and even a second box for half price. Even the URL has been thought out http://www.graze.com/feedyourfriends - nice!

So if you fancy trying the product and experiencing the brand please get your first box free by clicking here http://www.graze.com/p/BDM75M9 (if you are prompted to add the voucher code its BDM75M9).

Now if you do I will be given the option to get £1 off a future box or donate it to the Rainforest Alliance (which I will do). 

If this post has one point its this - I have taken personal time out (which is very sparse) to tell you about Graze. Neither I or my agency has any association with Graze. What they have done IMHO is create an amazing brand that I for one want to talk about. Compelling isn't it. 

Enjoy your box and please let me know by commenting below what you thought. 

Best

Myles Davidson
(some people have decided to follow me on Twitter - god bless them - you can too ----> http://www.twitter.com/mylesdavidson or simply @mylesdavidson)

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Tuesday, 18 August 2009

The agency / client conundrum - what would you do?

Let me set the scene (fellow agencies and freelancers might recognise all or some of this story)
 
You've built a good website for your client and they're happy hurrah! You get paid - you're happy. You then move into the marketing phase; SEO is a difficult pitch (at this stage) so you opt for a PPC campaign with Google. A test budget of £1000 is agreed and you do your job well; setup conversion tracking, do your research and manage the spend diligently. In fact you've done your job well enough for the client to double the spend for the next month - so far so good.
 
But, and here's the conundrum, because you manage a number of similar accounts you are not happy with a 1.79% click to conversion. The truth is you think this is just the early stages and you heartily recommend they invest in additional design time allowing you to develop a landing page with the goal to increase conversion. [Secretly you want to go all out and start A>B testing and in the back of your mind you are yearning to get into multivariate testing]
 
It is at this point that, for the first time, you do not have a meeting of minds. The client wants you to manage the increased spend but does not buy into the additional costs to develop a landing page?
 
At this point I would love to know - What you would do?
 
Please take 5 seconds to cast your vote: http://twtpoll.com/pjl17x
 
This was a scenario we (i-KOS) faced in July 2009 - I will share exactly what we did in a follow-up post in one week; along with the results from the poll.
 
You can follow my riffs, and ramblings on running an agency @mylesdavidson (http://www.twitter.com/mylesdavidson)

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Monday, 17 August 2009

The perils of auto-posting everywhere - you have been warned

Firstly I am a huge fan of Posterous so this post is not in anyway agin them. Moreover is is a heads-up warning to others, like me, who are dabling with a multitude of broadcast and micro-blogging tools; and really enjoying how they all 'talk' to each other.

 But here's the scenario (true story) whilst on a trip to LA I set-up my e-mail auto-notification (hands up who has already jumped to the punch line) and, yup you guessed it, I posted to Posterous (using the post@posterous.com) address. This then triggered a game of ping-pong between Posterous and my mail server; as Posterous mailed me back with a note letting me know my post has published successfully - which got my out office message - which appeared as a new post - which begot a message from Posterous - loop (50 got to 10 springs to mind).

 Worse still each post informed Twitter and my other blog (miles of marketing) and my Tumblr play space.

 By the time I deleted my linked accounts on Posterous and logged in and turned off my auto notification I had received over 200 e-mails, 200 posts, approx 50 twitters etc.

 Fortunately I mailed the guys at Posterous and my thanks goes to Sachin (Co-Founder) for his immediate assistance - who deleted all the erroneous posts, in a flash - and is I am sure going to put safe guards in place to stop this happening again. My concern is I could have just as easily posted from my iPhone without having all my passwords to hand and this would have caused havoc. As it is I had to spend a few hours deleting tweets, and posts.

 I am sure to the tech savvy this gets a sigh but to those, like me, simply trying to use this wonderfully simple technology be aware of the infinite loop possibilities when autoposting.

 To see what other mishaps and chaos I create you should follow me on twitter @mylesdavidson (http://www.twitter.com/mylesdavidson)

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Sunday, 9 August 2009

AudioBoo - Boo Part Picture courtesy of @documentally and Benjamin Ellis - good times

What was I thinking?

 

 Some of the other pictures from the AudioBoo Booparty:

 These from Christian Payne aka:@documentally
http://www.flickr.com/photos/christianpayne/

 These from Benjamin Ellis aka:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamin2/sets/72157621847753563/

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous

Seth's Blog as a .PDF Weirdest billboard ever (or brilliant targeting)

I have been experimenting with Tabbloid, a service that takes any rss feed and converts it into a magazine styled format delivered as an e-mail with the journal as an attached . PDF

I'm doing this as a means to capture some of my favourite blogs in a really readable format - something that allows me to properly read articles as opposed to the screen 'scrapping' I find my self doing when following a link from Twitter for example. 

Here is how my Tabbloid arrives daily based on one feed (you can set frequency and source of feeds).  

Contents

  1. Seth's Blog: Weirdest billboard ever (or brilliant targeting)

Want a copy? 

Use this link to get a copy of this Tabbloid. You'll receive your own copy to print and read!
http://www.tabbloid.com/share/44081/

Posted via email from mylesdavidson's posterous