PR Squared

About

Blogroll

PR 2.0 Tactics

PR Squared

The last couple of months’ of economic challenges notwithstanding, it’s been a great year. 

The Agency has nailed down several contracts with FORTUNE 1000 companies in the Consumer and Pharma industries, and scores of exciting start-ups.  Morale is good.  Most of our clients are happy.  And I can’t remember a time where I’ve felt more confidence in our team’s capabilities and our firm’s overall prospects.  KNOCK WOOD.

The blog has grown more popular.  In the Fall of 2006, there were about 150 RSS subscribers to PR-Squared.  In the Fall of 2007, we had about 1,000 subscribers.  Closing out 2008, looks like RSS subscribers are hovering at over 3,000 most days.  THANK YOU.  I try not to care but I do: keep in mind that I’ve been blogging since June 2004 … so it took me two years to get my first 150 subscribers!  Trust me, I am hugely grateful that you’re here; I die a little inside whenever I lose an RSS subscriber.  Maybe we’ll gain more loyal readers in 2009?  KNOCK WOOD.

I’ve made many new friends this year.  Folks I used to watch and admire from afar have become confidants.  Yes, we’re all too busy to do beers and BBQs together but I genuinely like my industry peers.  (You know who you are.)  Hopefully we’ll have more opportunities to grab coffees, brainstorm, share newbiz leads, etc., in 2009.  KNOCK WOOD.

After 8 years of what felt like a foreign occupation of our seat of government, there are sober, thoughtful, strong people (of both parties) taking the reins of U.S. government.  They are facing down enormous challenges but I have fresh faith in our direction as a people, as a country.  Yes, we can get through our current travails.  KNOCK WOOD.

My family is happy and healthy.  Yea, we’ve got two teenagers in the house and yea, it’s just as challenging as the self-help books and sitcoms suggest — but I’m not complaining.  Our problems are typical problems.  KNOCK WOOD.

I try to keep things simple.  I try to prioritize.  Am I doing the right things for my family, my clients, my team, my friends, my industry?  — Yes?  Good.  Go eat turkey.  Take a nap.  Do it all over again on Monday. 

And keep knocking wood.

I hope that you have also been able to keep things relatively simple; that you are pleased with the allies you’ve made and the contributions you’ve shared.  Thanks so much for your support.  Have a great Thanksgiving!

Posted by Todd Defren at 09:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

Marketing measurement guru Katie Paine pointed to a recent blog post of mine re: Social Media Measurement ROI in her most recent newsletter article. 

I am always honored when I merit Katie’s attention — but, darn it! — I think she called me (and my ilk) a “menace” because I seemed to hem-and-haw about the ability to measure Social Media Marketing. 

Seriously, though, I have been an advocate for measurement for a long time — and even went to considerable expense to try to figure it out for clients.  So this paragraph in Katie’s newsletter caught my attention:

“Another popular reason that PR/SM ‘can't be measured’ is that, ‘You can't isolate PR from everything else the organization is doing!’ But yes, in fact, you can. It might take some coordination with advertising, or some sophisticated ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) but it can be done, and is being done every day. (Measurement is) hard … particularly for the math-phobic PR folks. It requires calculations and analytics and a bunch of things that PR people hate.”

As I noted to Katie in a follow-up email, the big challenge is not just the math-phobia of marketers.  The bigger challenges relate to the time; the expense; the lack of agreed-to approaches and relevant metrics (as in “what’s relevant?”); and, the potential need to collaborate at both a strategy and a systems-level with external agencies, as well as with other internal departments like Sales and Finance. 

Phew!  Say that 5x fast.

Measurement is GOOD but arguably too hard to countenance, especially when the anecdotal benefits of PR and Social Media (e.g., “website traffic spiked after that NYT hit!”) are often “good enough” to keep the engine running. 

I strongly believe that corporations who do spend the time/resources to “figure it out” would find that PR/SM’s benefits outstripped any other marketing program – which is why I am a big fan of Marketing Measurement.  Yet, it is hard to find companies willing and able to do the hard work (especially among startups, but even amongst our FORTUNE 500 clients).

Hope that clarifies my stance for Katie.  I am NOT anti-measurement, NOT a non-believing menace; just a rueful pragmatist (who is also, yes, admittedly, bad at math).

Posted by Todd Defren at 08:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

When gearing up to help a client with a big announcement, we pump ourselves up at the Agency.  We’re optimistic.  We know we’ve got the chops, the creativity, the connections.  We’ll make something good happen!

But with clients, we play the pessimist card.  For as much as we feel an underlying confidence in our powers, we also know how hard this job can be; we know how fickle are the Fates.  So before any big announcement, we make it a point to tell clients about all the factors that could possibly screw up their odds at coverage …

And yet … the “expectation setting” game is still tricky. 

Sometimes luck and hard-work pay off, and we wind up scoring big.  Sometimes we’re spot-on about the challenges, and the client news receives paltry coverage.  Sometimes we simply strike out.  No one bats 1.000.

The “problem” is that most often, we score.  And that sets a bar that subsequent “expectation setting” conversations can’t dislodge.  We become the lady that doth protest too much; the boy who cries wolf. 

After we moan about the PR challenges of the client’s latest product launch plan, they start to say, “Yea, yea, I know it’s a bad idea to launch this product at a busy tradeshow, on a Friday evening, with no spokespeople available — but you guys will pull it off.” 

And, thus hogtied, we screw the pooch.

Great media coverage requires careful planning.  It requires spadework in the form of dozens of pitches customized for individual reporters and bloggers, and a careful logistical dance in setting up appointments.  You can’t dump a press release on your PR agency a day or two before it’s scheduled to go live, and also expect them to shoot the moon.

Call this whining if you want: it’s an age-old complaint in the PR game.  But maybe I can convince at least one marketer to take a breath before making unreasonable demands. 

It’s not an unreasonable demand to expect great media coverage.  It’s simply unreasonable to make that demand without truly listening to your PR counsel’s expert advice on how-to make it happen.

Posted by Todd Defren at 10:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Wanna talk (yet again) about the ROI of Social Media & PR?

Let’s ask the startup companies who rely on the VC community’s support.  Did PR help them net funding?

A survey sponsored by BIGfrontier Communications Group asked 300 U.S. startups that had received funding within the past 3 years about the role of PR in their fund-raising efforts.

According to a PRWeek story that ran today, the new study showed that:

• Startup companies that engage in PR campaigns are 30% more successful in getting funding within one to three months than those that don't.
• Forty-four percent of the respondents who used PR outreach received funding in the one-to-three-month time period versus 14% of those that did not.
• Seventy-eight percent of respondents who said PR helped in their funding efforts are planning to use some of their VC dollars for additional PR.
• Ironically, the survey also found that only 18% of the 300 startups surveyed had a PR program in place during the funding process.

Of the 82% of startups who did not avail themselves of PR assistance, BIGFrontier’s Steve Lundin noted, “They don't understand that had they spent money on PR services, they would shorten the funding cycle … When you're able to walk into a room and someone has heard of your company, (there is a much greater) sense of validation … than walking into a room cold.”

I’ve often made a similar claim to clients, citing anecodtal evidence that PR helps raise valuations, whether in fund-raising or for exit strategies … And on the latter front, I’ve even seen clients’ competitors snap them up just to get the PR engine turned off!

And in these recessionary times, as many smart business people consistently note, “getting the word out” is expecially critical for startups.  As VC Fred Wilson tweeted today: “There's no blanket wisdom for entrepreneurs raising money right now. It's a mixed bag VC market. Strong deals getting done.”  

One measure of “a strong deal?”  A strong reputation.  Just as the BIGFrontier study implies.

It’s nice to see some evidence and ackowledgement for that fact, directly from startup executives themselves.

Posted by Todd Defren at 06:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

A lot of PR people I know – particularly those affiliated with the tech and social media industries – make frequent daily visits to Techmeme.  What is Techmeme?  Here’s their “ABOUT TECHMEME” blurb:

“At this moment, the hottest stories in technology are scattered across dozens of news sites and blogs.  That's an awful lot of sites for anyone to check.  Fortunately, Techmeme arranges all of these links into a single, easy-to-scan page. It's auto-generated through a news-picking software system, so updates occur around the clock.”

In a recent email to his subscribers, the ever-helpful, often-brilliant Sam Whitmore of Mediasurvey performed an analysis of the changes that occured over the past year at Techmeme’s Leaderboard, the meme minder’s top 100 sources.  Sam analyzed snapshots of the Leaderboard on October 1, 2007 versus October 1, 2008.  Here’s a look at the Top 10:

1. TechCrunch (still at the top)
2. CNET News (up from 5th)
3. Silicon Alley Insider (up from 13th)
4. VentureBeat (up from 25th)
5. New York Times (down from 3rd)
6. Ars Technica (down from 4th)
7. AppleInsider (up from 49th)
8. Gizmodo (up from 15th)
9. Wall Street Journal (up from 10th)
10. ReadWriteWeb (down from 6th)

Other notable entries would include InfoWorld at #36 in 2008, down from #11 in 2007; BusinessWeek’s drop from 28th position to #48; and Computerworld’s drop from the Top 20 on the Leaderboard to #34 as of October 2008.

If you believe that Techmeme presents a reasonable view as to hot trends in technology reporting online, there are some interesting takeaways from Sam’s research. 

Most notably: from a media coverage standpoint, it’s a good time to be affiliated with gadgets, content, Web 2.0 apps and (no surprise) economic trends and venture capital.  The precipitous Leaderboard drops for publications like Computerworld and InfoWorld, in particular, suggest that “B2B Tech” is of little interest of late.

Partly this may be because the “cool stuff” is making inroads into the enterprise.  Partly this may be because the recessionary trends were already underway by October ‘08, making enterprise technology less interesting to budget-conscious buyers.  And partly this may be because the world of tech/social media has broadened considerably in the past year: it’s not just for geeks anymore.

There’s one key takeaway that all PR pros should understand: Sam Whitmore is a guy worth the subscription price.
 

Posted by Todd Defren at 12:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

At a recent Social Media Breakfast in Boston, Harvard Business School associate professor Andy McAfee had this to say about the age-old Return On Investment (ROI) question:

“There is not enough ROI for figuring out ROI.  It is an intellectually bankrupt exercise.”

Got that?  McAfee is not saying that measurement is not important, he suggests instead that it is simply not worth the trouble!

To be clear, when McAfee talks about the challenges in determining ROI, he is referring to Info Tech spending, as laid out in two posts published back in 2006.  According to McAfee, the sum of his argument was succinctly laid out in his Harvard colleague Bob Kaplan’s seminal “Strategy Maps” tome.  I am going to excerpt and bastardize Kaplan’s text, for my fellow marketers:

"No marketing program has value that can be measured separately or independently.  The value of marketing derives from its ability to help the organization implement its strategy … Marketing programs seldom have a direct impact on financial outcomes such as increased revenues, lowered costs, and higher profits.  (Rather,) Marketing affects financial outcomes through chains of cause-and-effect relationships."

This is even more true in the Social Media era.  Jason Falls wrote a rock-solid – and highly popular – post about Social Media ROI last month, containing this gem:

“The problem with trying to determine ROI for social media is you are trying to put numeric quantities around human interactions and conversations, which are not quantifiable.”

Or as David Meerman Scott is fond of saying, “What is the ROI of putting on your pants?”

At this point you’re thinking that I am anti-measurement.  I’m not.  I believe in measurement-by-objective: once you know which needle you want to move, decide how to make it move and how to keep track of progress.

The brilliant Peter Kim, a former Forrester analyst, outlined a framework for measuring Social Media in a September post:

1. Attention.  The amount of traffic to your content for a given period of time.  Similar to the standard web metrics of site visits and page/video views.
2. Participation.  The extent to which users engage with your content in a channel.  Think blog comments, Facebook wall posts, YouTube ratings, or widget interactions.
3. Authority.  A la Technorati, the inbound links to your content - like trackbacks and inbound links to a blog post or sites linking to a YouTube video.
4. Influence.  The size of the user base subscribed to your content.  For blogs, feed or email subscribers; followers on Twitter or Friendfeed; or fans of your Facebook page.

There's an "x-factor" that comes into play well:  Sentiment.  The spirit driving user participation matters.  The net result of these adds up to a score for social media engagement.

So what's the monetary value of a visit, comment, link, or friend?  Well, the only honest answer is "it depends."  Only you know how much these interactions matter to your brand, regardless of industry, channel, or competitive results.

The just-as-brilliant current Forrester analyst, Jeremiah Owyang, also offers a whole series of posts related to the measurement issue – but my favorite of the group notes the fundamental difficulty:

(Until) we can measure the impact of a conversation between an employee and a prospect at a coffee shop, it (will be) difficult to measure social media…

What are you trying to accomplish? … (The) trick is to figure out what your goal is first – is it to spread a message among a community? Is it to reduce support costs? Is it to learn from your community? In each of these cases you’ll have to then assign the right attributes to measure against.

So, yea, basically it’s tough to measure ROI for Social Media. This doesn’t mean it is not worth doing!  It just means that the justifications that professional marketers will make to qualify for budget are as likely to be anecdotal as analytical/quanitifiable.

What is the dollar value of responding humanely to an angry customer blogger in their public forum, or, say, on Amazon.com?  Have you made that customer happier?  Maybe.  Have you made other visitors feel good about your publicly-displayed good intentions and responsiveness?  No doubt. 

But did the effort motivate more sales?  How could you tell?  There is no “I am buying this product because ____” form in the Amazon Checkout Cart. 

How much money do you save by having the PR agency monitor Amazon.com, or the blogosphere, so that your customer support reps can instead be on-the-phone with live end-users?  There could be a formula for that, but I’m no math whiz. 

How much value can you place on the fact that the professional communicators at a PR firm trained the Customer Support reps on tone, responsiveness, etc., before letting them loose to represent the brand in the blogosphere?  You can’t measure the value of something that didn’t happen (i.e., a blow-up in the blogs based on a poorly-trained public spokesperson). 

Doth I protest too much?

Ironically, for all the hemming and hawing, it is sometimes easier to show “needle movement” via traditional PR.  For one start-up client, “new users” was the metric we were asked to improve.  They came to us with a base of 5,000 alpha users, and our outreach to traditional and social media outlets led to an additional 200,000 users in just two weeks!  How’s that for ROI?

Lessons?

Know your objectives in advance.  Start small, when possible: think “proof of concept.”  Track the metrics obsessively.  Make sure that your interactive marketing efforts are tied to the sales funnel (e.g., your vp of sales ought to be able to determine where most leads are coming from online).  Report frequently. 

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Posted by Todd Defren at 12:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBacks (1)

By now you are probably aware of this past weekend’s twitterstorm over the Motrin commercial that outraged mombloggers and momtweeters.

Here’s the original ad:

And here’s just one example of the storm of protest that erupted:

Jeremiah Owyang did some great analysis of the firememe and concluded “It’s not likely to cause enough of impact search engine results for ‘motrin,’ be a mainstream press story, or cause damage to stock price … Over time, these search results may fade away...”

While he’s no doubt right, a Google search on “Motrin” today (Monday)turned up two high-profile results related to the controversy, at the top and bottom of the 1^st page of results.

Top of results page:

Bottom of results page:

Many Social Media pundits, myself included, have been known to make pithy proclamations like “Google is your new homepage.”  There’s no getting around the fact that The GOOG adores the always-fresh content served up by the blogosphere.  And since Google is such an outsized part of how the typical consumer interacts with the Web, all brands (but especially BIG brands) need to be cognizant of the fact that their online reputation is a precious asset that must be cultivated – and guarded. 

If you’re targeting MOMS you ought to know that there are ~14,000 of them with strong opinions in the Social Media sphere.  Maybe you could ask a few of ‘em to check out your expensive new advertisement before you release it? 

We’re not talking about some podunk brand: we’re talking about MOTRIN, a billion-dollar brand with oodles of marketing funds.  Even if Motrin execs didn’t know any better, their ad firm ought to have had a clue (not that the ad would be controversial — though that’s debatable too — but that it was worth testing out with some online influencers before wide distribution). 

For more good stuff on the #motrinmoms issue, see David Armano of Logic + Emotion and Andy Beal over at MarketingPilgrim.

Posted by Todd Defren at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

As I wrote about last month in the “Mo’ Marketing” post, we’re working with Canadian Club Whisky to promote awareness of men’s health issues, through their sponsorship of “Movember.”

We created a Facebook app that allows you to slap a “mo” on your friends’ FB profile pics, which has been fun.  And just for kicks I’ve asked my Twitter pals to add a moustache to their own Twitter avatars … with hilarious results!

I am hoping to send some small prizes, at random, to the tweeps who are willing to disgrace their Twitter profiles through the month of November for a good cause. 

It’s not too late, if you want to join the fun!  Use the Movember Facebook app to create a moustachioed picture. Do a screengrab (in Windows, CTRL + PrtScrn). Paste to Microsoft Paint. Cut & save the newly-mo'd avatar pic. Re-save as a jpeg to your desktop and then add to your Twitter Profile in place of your old avatar.

Then, be sure to let me know, either in the Comments below or by sending a message to @tdefren on Twitter.  Thanks for your support! 

Posted by Todd Defren at 01:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (9)

Lately we’ve received a spate of client inquiries about Wikipedia. 

“Can we create our own entry?  Can we edit our entry?  How do you find the line between promotion and fact?  Why is Wikipedia so important in the first place?” 

Here are some answers.

When you think about your old Britannica, the encyclopedias of yesteryear only included “major” subjects, those that would be of wide interest to the majority of people.  Wikipedia, however, has a stunning breadth that matches the interests of a diverse, global population.  It is an encyclopedia by the people, for the people. 

And Wikipedia’s influence has skyrocketed in recent years.  It is constantly linked to by bloggers, and is constantly being updated: as a result, Wikipedia entries rank quite high in Google search results – which only adds to the site’s power.

There’s a “dark side” to Wikipedia’s popularity, influence and openness. 

Marketers have been known to try to take advantage, by adding or editing entries about their companies, competitors or industries: they know that Wikipedia is viewed as an authoritative resource, so if they can “sneak” some salutary edits into the system, it could benefit their reputation.

Having been burned numerous times on this front, Wikipedia now has strict guidelines to block organizations from writing their own profiles.  From the site: “Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum for advertising or self-promotion, or a vanity press.” 

Wikipedia has “Conflict of Interest” rules, to discourage self-promotion.  One of the ways they test if an organization is “worthy” of its own entry is to see how many reliable, independent, secondary sources are already talking about the topic and/or organization. 

This is definitely a frustration for many people, who complain that Wikipedia has an established culture and format and that its top editors can seem (arbitrarily) fastidious. And it is particularly tough for marketers to swallow.  “Why is Wikipedia is open to all … except to business people?”  (Because they tend to abuse the privilege, that’s why.)

So, should you try to create a Wikipedia entry about your company or product, or for that new Three-Letter-Acronym you just created?

The answer is, “Maybe.”  You need to understand the “rules of the road” – and even then (to extend the car analogy), “your mileage may vary.”

If you do decide to create or edit an entry in Wikipedia, you need to strip your content of all marketing language or plaudits.  Just the facts. 

Ask yourself whether you already have enough PR clout to warrant a Wikipedia listing.  If you’re a start-up or a local pizzeria, it’s not likely you need (or deserve) a Wikipedia entry. 

Ask yourself if Wikipedia is going to offer more content to people than what you’d offer on your own website.  If the answer is, “No, but Wikipedia has better Google juice,” then sheathe your keyboard.  

Wikipedia is a place for official data points that could add context about your industry, as well as to catalog significant events (good and bad).  Wikipedia is not a place for promotion or tomfoolery.  Keep in mind that even if your edits slip past the official wiki cops, some troublemaker (or competitor!) could use WikiScanner to call you out for manipulation.

And what if your company already has a Wikipedia entry – and you don’t like it?

According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, speaking at a Direct Marketing Association event, the course is clear:

• Don't just change the page. You will look like you are trying to manipulate it unethically (even if you aren't).
• Every Wikipedia page has a “Discussion” tab.  Enter your questions, additions, and complaints here. 
• The editors will read them and address them. 
• Most important: It demonstrates that you, the business, understand correct Wikipedia etiquette.

Over time, you may also want to encourage third-party resources (happy customers?) to work on the entry, if possible.  But, again, they’d need to keep their assistance neutral, transparent, and factual.

Whatever you do, don’t ask your PR firm to get involved directly in the editing.  The agency can help gut-check the content’s quality and tone, but PR types are not welcome on Wikipedia.  (We can’t even edit the entry on Public Relations! – But that’s another post.)

Hope this helps.  If it did, maybe you could share it with your pals?  And subscribe to PR-Squared?  Thanks!

Posted by Todd Defren at 11:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (14)

This is an open letter to my competitors.

Just so you know, if one of my clients or prospects were to offer me your materials (proposals, brochures, etc.), I would happily accept the offer. 

I compete with you.  By beating you, I get to put food on the table; put my kids through college; buy that dream chalet in the mountains.  By beating you, I provide that same opportunity to SHIFT’s 100+ hard-working employees. 

It’s important to beat you.  I take pride in it, because it’s never guaranteed – it is always, always hard, you cagey and talented SOBs!   

So if you have better ideas than me, a better presentation, etc., I want to learn from you.  So I can improve.  So I can beat you next time.

I assume you feel the same way.  I hope you do.

So, are you reading my best-of posts?  Are you reading Brian’s blog?  And Dave’s?  And Geoff’s?  And Mike’s?  And Maggie’s?  And Steve’s?

I read their blogs.  Not just because I like them and support their work (which I do).  Make no mistake: at some level, we are competing for clients.  So I read their blogs religiously to see if I can “steal” their ideas and share them with my staff.

Except, it’s not stealing.  They offer up some of their smartest ideas – for free.  In the hopes that prospective clients will be impressed, sure, but just as importantly as a karmic service to the industry – including their competitors.

By reading your competitors’ finest thinking, by incorporating their proven strategies and cutting-edge concepts into your own agencies’ DNA, you have a golden opportunity to kick their butt in the next RFP.

But, are you?

Posted by Todd Defren at 09:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (23)

I’ll be participating in the popular For Immediate Release podcast (FIR) later today with Shel Holtz and Neville Hobson, joined by luminaries like Katie Paine, Sherilynne Starkie, Rob Lane, CEO of Overlay.tv and Michael O’Connor Clarke of ThornleyFallis.

This group of brainiacs be discussing the issues raised by Jason Calacanis a few weeks ago re: the role of PR for startups.

Some of the specific questions we’ll discuss re: startup PR?

• What can a PR professional do for a startup that a CEO can't or shouldn't do?
• What PR activities or outcomes are important to a startup beyond publicity?
• What CAN a startup CEO do to promote his company?
• What are the considerations for selecting a PR agency for a startup? What should they look for in an agency?
• How should a startup measure the ROI of its PR activities?

I’ve defended the PR industry ad nauseum.  I readily admit that it often needs defending: the behind-the-scenes nature of PR in the pre-blogging era allowed too many bad practices — and sloppy practitioners — to flourish.  It will take a while before these cretins are flushed from the system, and an even longer while before the PR industry’s reputation gains luster.

But the good guys are winning.  And will be talking about it today.

Meanwhile, here are some of my first-blush answers to some of those questions re: PR for startups…

What can a PR professional do for a startup that a CEO can't or shouldn't do?

 

While I applaud CEOs like Jason, Seesmic’s Loic LeMeur and Zappos’s Tony Hsieh, how many OTHER high-profile startup CEOs can you name?  Maybe (maybe!) you can think of a handful of others?  Now consider that there are hundreds-upon-hundreds of startup companies and you realize that there are very few startup CEOs with the right combination of TIME, SAVVY and CHARISMA to be a CEO and a one-man Marketing Dept.  It’s important for the CEO to be Cheerleader-In-Chief but their full-time job is running the company operations, not PR.

 

A good PR agency can aid in objective messaging; widespread relationships across numerous industries, media outlets and the blogosphere; crisis communications; competitive monitoring; and, content development, among other duties. 

 

What PR activities are important to a startup beyond publicity?

 

I have come to hate the word “publicity” because it reminds me of celebrity dish in STAR Magazine.  Nowadays Public Relations is less about publicity and more about relationships… but, beyond “getting ink” a PR agency can aid in messaging and strategy, relationship building (e.g., with industry analysts) and research.  And, again, I think content development and distribution will play a big role in Marketing’s future, and PR can help. 

 

A PR firm is also handy for “mistake avoidance.”  This is particularly important as new rules are being written for how-to market in the Social Media era.

 

What CAN a startup CEO do to promote his company?

 

Look, I applaud the PR-savvy CEOs mentioned above and in a perfect world, they would serve as a model for others.  I’ve met thousands of startup CEOs in the past 15 years; the best of them “know what they don’t know” and are glad to act as a true partner with their PR agencies and marketing executives.

 

What are the considerations for selecting a PR agency for a startup?

 

Credentials.  Chemistry.  Commitment.

 

Does the PR agency know the market?  Do you like your entire team?  Is your account truly valuable or will it play 2^nd fiddle behind much larger agency-of-record clients? 

 

At SHIFT, for example, despite having some big-name clients like Akamai, Jim Beam Worldwide, BearingPoint, etc. we insist that no single client represent more than 15% of revenue.  So no client is too important, and no client is not important.  Your chosen firm should be able to offer similar assurances.

 

How should a startup measure the ROI of its PR activities?

 

Cop-out answer?  It depends.  The important measurements vary from company to company.  Sales leads?  Buzz?  New user sign-ups?

 

Tell your firm how you want to measure success so they can plan their program accordingly.  But be prepared to help them measure, i.e., the client needs to be willing and able to enable and monitor their own systems to see if the PR results are working as-hoped.  You want new users?  Great – but watch your web traffic and CRM systems to see if spikes correspond to great hits in the media, etc.

 

Oh, shoot.  Now you have less reason to listen in today!  Well, I am just one of many smart folks participating in today’s FIR podcast, and I look forward to learning a few things, myself!

 

Posted by Todd Defren at 10:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

I cannot and should not be cured of my stress, but merely taught to enjoy it. – Hans Selye

There’s no denying it. It is everywhere. Every person I meet is talking about it. I can’t seem to avoid it. IT – is NOT the economy, stupid. IT is stress.

While the economy is one source of stress for many people these days, it is only one of many. When I talk to friends, I hear, “I’m not getting enough sleep. I can’t get away from the television (or the computer), I don’t want to miss anything that’s happening.” Or, “There just aren’t enough hours in the day…”

And forget about the conversations with my friends who are parents. That’s another whole topic.

The Stress Institute says that stress is the epidemic of the 21^st century.

The American Institute of Stress defines it as “a condition or feeling experienced when a person perceives that demands exceed the personal and social resources the individual is able to mobilize.”

We live in a world where our ability to connect with others is limitless. The Internet and social networking provide us with a means of connecting with others that may help with reducing our stress. Abraham Maslow, the American psychologist most well known for the “hierarchy of human needs,” described the “sense of belonging” as one of the social needs that is core to our self-actualization.

Perhaps it is no surprise that social networking has exploded in recent years. It provides a way of connecting with like-minded individuals instantly. It doesn’t matter if you want to find a date, play scrabble on-line, learn photography or find others to go kayaking with. A social network on almost any topic is a few clicks away.

Research shows that bonding results from these interactions and creates a feeling of belonging and connectedness.  The effects of stress are lessened through such interpersonal relationships and strong support systems.

So whether you are Skyping, Twittering, or texting, be grateful for the interactions your social network provides, and use it as a way to lessen the impact of the stress that is going around.

Mari Ryan is a friend of mine, and CEO of AdvancingWellness, in the Boston area.  AdvancingWellness delivers custom designed worksite wellness programs, empowering healthy lifestyles for employees of small & medium-sized businesses. 

Posted by Todd Defren at 08:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

April Dunford is Director of Business Development at Nortel. She heads up marketing for Nortel's Incubation Program, responsible for bringing new products to market.  She’s a savvy marketer and blogger.

And despite her former skepticism, April is now also a huge fan of Social Media Releases.  (Yea, I am back on that kick.)

April recently detailed some amazing results for her first Social Media Releases… 

The first one – which she admitted was a not very newsworthy release about Nortel’s corporate green policy – led to “more press interviews than I’ve done in the past two years.  I was on national television.  I did a video for Forbes.com.  The Chicago Tribune, L.A. Times (etc.) all did stories with us in addition to the dozens of bloggers and online news sources who picked up the story and linked to our video – Spectacular!”

It’s not uncommon for corporations “try out” an SMR with a minor news announcement, just to see how things go.  April’s first SMR got uncommonly good results because she and her colleagues did an uncommonly good job of adding relevant tags, storyline angles and multimedia content.

Buoyed by the first SMR’s success, April’s second social media release was more ambitious: it was used to announce a new product.  “We put together a new blog and included the link and feed to the blog in the release.  We shot a video interview with the product architect and had some video of the prototype of the product.  We created a Flickr site and posted screen shots of the product.”

“Again, the results (of the SMR) were spectacular.  In the community of bloggers and online news sources focused in our product space, there were dozens of articles and a lot of discussion about the product.  I was on TV twice, and the architect of the product also did national television.  BusinessWeek did a podcast with our CTO on the subject, I did interviews with 4 newspapers including the Wall Street Journal, we got several inquiries from analysts, our blog was getting 100 uniques a day in the first week and we got invited to speak at a couple of conferences.” 

I was also in correspondence today with Beth Harte, a marketing blogger who has also been experimenting with Social Media Releases.  She recently sent a BIG announcement over BusinessWire in traditional format, and a MINOR announcement out, SMR-style, via PRWeb.  According to Beth’s subsequent Google Analytics performance review, the minor news SMR generated 1,330 hits/inbound links, while the big traditional news release netted just 243.

“Moving forward I will only use SMRs,” says Beth.

Convinced, yet?  Maybe just a little bit?

I’ve always said that the adoption of the Social Media Release would be a long slog.  But I’ve also often said that its Web-friendly, social nature will put the SMR on “the right side of history.”  Experiences like Beth and April’s are further evidence that change is a’foot.

P.S. – April did not provide links to her SMRs in her original post.  I’ve asked her for the links and will update the post when/if she gets back to me.

P.P.S. – Please note my “radical suggestions” for SMRs before you run off and spend a million dollars on a slew of new SMRs!

Posted by Todd Defren at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (14)

I feel really, really good about this election.  It had some tough moments but overall, the winning candidate crossed the line after a sustained marathon marked by grace and intellect.

Our problems won’t vanish.  Mistakes will still be made.  But we’re in better hands, I know it.  Expect a better world.

It’s back to work tomorrow.  We must continue to steel ourselves to beat back the bears of a grim recession.  Tonight, though, let’s feel good!

Posted by Todd Defren at 11:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The “Chief Marketing Officer” of the Obama campaign must be David Plouffe.  He’s the candidate’s campiagn manager (working alongside chief strategist David Axelrod), and while I know he has a ton of supporting players – including the invaluable Joe Rospars of Blue State Digital – I presume that Plouffe’s the mastermind of the communications and “packaging” approaches.  While Obama won “Marketer of the Year” plaudits from AdAge earlier this week, let’s give some credit where it’s due.  Obama is a brilliant politician but likely not a bonafide marcomm expert.

If Plouffe can be considered the CMO, then whether his candidate wins or loses tomorrow, I nominate Plouffe as “CMO of the Freakin’ Decade.”

Think about what’s been accomplished in 2 years.  Think about the candidate as a product.  Every detail has been meticulously planned in the Obama roll-out. 

I am not just talking about the speeches. 

I am talking about the logo and its many permutations (pictured). 

The font on all campaign materials. 

The advertising production values, creativity, tone and placement.

The absolutely brilliant use of text messaging.

The embrace of voters’ clever use of pumpkins.  Pumpkins!

The unprecedented Get Out The Vote movement.

The active and intelligent use of Social Networking.

The overall message consistency has been solid as a rock.  It’s a classic case of “Tell the people what you want them to hear.  Tell them again.  Tell them that you’ve told them, and then remind them again about what they’ve been told.” (Then, repeat!)  Compare that message discipline to the truly erratic, mudcake-du-jour McCain campaign.

That’s not to say that there haven’t been mis-steps.  The Clinton drama lasted too long; the flag pin b.s. was an unnecessary distraction; the Jeremiah Wright videos (‘nuff said); the “cling to guns and religion” line, which was allowed to be taken out of context and blown out of proportion (but showed uncharacteristic ignorance of the ubiquity of basic audio/visual capturing technology that’s in every consumer’s pocket). 

But in each case, as noted with simple brilliance by NYTimes columnist Gail Collins, the Obama campaign proved that at its core it is truly “anti-dumb.”  It’s been willing to tack left/right/center to ameliorate the impact of distractions. So you can add “crisis communications” to the list of solid PR attributes of this campaign.

Vote (!!!!!) for the candidate of your choice tomorrow.  But if you are a regular reader of this blog, I know you’ll join me in tipping your hat to what has been a remarkably successful marketing strategy.  Kudos, Mr. Plouffe (and good luck tomorrow)!

For additional campaign marketing posts, check out Ed Moed and WaggEd’s Frank X. Shaw.

Disclosure: I am voting for Obama. But for what it’s worth, I registered as a Republican in 2000 just to vote for McCain (vs. Bush) in those long-ago primaries.

Posted by Todd Defren at 11:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)