According to the ‘Social Media Revolution’ video from Socialnomics, 96% of Generation Y or Millennials (born between 1980 and 2000 or thereabouts) are part of an online social network and yet the fastest growing segment of Facebook is females aged 55-65 years old.

Ashton Kutcher and Britney Spears have more Twitter followers than the entire populations of Sweden, Israel, Switzerland, Ireland, Norway and Panama, and half the mobile internet traffic in the UK is for Facebook. Over 50% of the world’s population is under 30 years old and email is considered old technology by a significant number of them.

We are connecting, communicating and revealing personal and professional details about ourselves more openly than ever before. In the time it takes to read this post around 50 hours of video will be uploaded to YouTube, the world’s second largest search engine.

We tap out information about ourselves at the stroke of a key and yet rarely think about the damage that can be caused to our reputation, both online and off, by posting careless remarks and images.

Even if we don’t write the words ourselves, others are writing about us, and in this digital age of instant upload it’s worth remembering that the camera is always rolling, the microphone is always on, and there’s no such thing as ‘off-the-record’.

(more…)

New Year resolutions happen every year, but predictions generally only occur at the turn of a decade. Knowing what might happen before it actually occurs would certainly be handy.

If we could predict what might happen it would certainly give us a competitive edge.  We could be ‘one-step-ahead-of-the-game’, give us an opportunity to maximise every opportunity and put all our efforts into those things likely to generate the greatest reward – whatever we might want that to be.

Moving from the ‘noughties’ to the teen years of the 21st Century  gives us a opportunity, not only to look back on what happend between 2000 and 2009 – think iTunes, the social media explosion and wireless internet – but also to look ahead and predict what might happen during 2010 and beyond. (more…)

Have you checked out where you (or your name) pop up on Google lately? You should. You might be surprised at what comes up.

School and college students putting fake profiles of teachers on websites such as Bebo and Facebook is probably the tip of what’s likely to become an iceberg. Irritate or upset someone in our digital world and you might find yourself being reviled and fraudulently represented in the virtual world.

Think it couldn’t happen to you? Think again. All Black Richie McCaw’s image has apparently been used by a Las Vegas casino worker looking for love on a dating website and Palmerston North woman, Maree Briggs, discovered a photo of her was being used by a US company to promote diet pills she’s never used or even heard of.

Online information about you – or someone with the same name as you – can open doors or slam them shut, as New Zealander Bevin Skelton found out. Finding it hard to secure a teaching job in China, he did a Google search for his name and discovered comments about a woman with the same name and associates of hers, who were described as anti-Asian racists, came up at the top search outcomes.

Although more than a decade old, the piece did nothing to help his job-hunting prospects. Although Mr Skelton asked for the comments to be removed, the website owner chose not to remove them. They did, however, add additional text to the post to make it clear the comments referred to a woman and not Mr Bevin Skelton, the teacher.

It’s not vain or egotistical to search for your name or references to yourself on the internet, it’s essential. You can’t hope to gain corrections and clarifications if needed if you don’t know what’s out there, whether it’s true or not, and even if it refers to you.

Creating and maintaining a positive online presence on websites such as TRUSTcite, LinkedIn and Ecademy, will go some way towards offsetting any adverse comments and should be nurtured. Creating a positive online presence to counter any adverse comments is an investment worth making.

Yesterday the following 60-second tip from Get to the Po!nt at MarketingProfs.com popped into my email inbox. I was about to write my own post on the power of feedbacks – positive and negative – but this came up and I can see no reason to comment on it or edit it in any way. I absolutely agree with it! It’s why TRUSTcite has both a good and not-so-good feedback facility rather than just positive feedback only. Professional speaker and business growth consultant Bill James is certainly using positive feedback to great effect. The original article on MarketingProfs is here. The email article started:

Nobody likes negative feedback—and in the harsh glare of the Internet, where anonymity often breeds bad manners, complaints left on your Web site can feel especially scathing. It’s understandable to be tempted to block comments entirely or to delete those that criticize your product or service.

Natalie Ferguson, who blogs at Duct Tape Marketing, says you should re-think the value of negative comments. “I have yet to see an example of bad feedback actually hurting a good company.” She explains her position with the following three points:

Nobody’s perfect. It’s only natural that some customers will have issues. In fact, a page full of blazingly happy and unanimous feedback is more likely to raise suspicion than to allay concerns.

It might be the only feedback you get. People who won’t write a letter or make a phone call might leave an online comment. “Embrace it,” says Natalie. Use the input as constructive criticism to improve your business.

Respond with a positive solution. Promptly and openly resolve the issue with a free replacement, a discount or an explanation. You may win back a customer. You’ll certainly impress other readers.

The Po!nt: Allowing negative feedback on your website might bruise your ego, but it’s unlikely to hurt your business if you handle it well. Your willingness to publicly deal with problems might even enhance your credibility and build more customer loyalty.

Want to become a master networker? According to networking guru Robyn Henderson, it’s not something you do, it’s something you live.

Her advice for those wanting to improve their networking skills is pertinent, practical and easy to apply. She certainly knows her stuff. As such, it was a pleasure to hear her speak at an HRINZ event last week and pass on some of the pearls of wisdom she so willingly shared.

In essence, networking is about building trust. Three golden rules she gave at the presentation were:

1. Give without expectation
2. Maintain an abundance mentality and
3. Reciprocate – even if it’s not to the person who’s given to you (pay it forward and back)

She also gave a fourth tip which makes a huge difference to how you approach networking:

4. Act like the host and not the guest

People enjoy being around interesting, convivial people. If you act like the host and not the guest and make others feel listened to and welcome, you’re a long way towards becoming a master networker. You’ll find out more about who they are and the challenges they are facing and therefore be in a stronger position to provide contacts and solutions for them, even if those solutions have nothing to do with you directly.

Robyn’s advice regarding whether to attend an event not so much by its topic or speaker but by who’s likely to be attending was a nugget too. That’s partly why it’s called net-work, not net-sit, net-yawn or net-eat. For productive networkers the speaker and topic are a bonus!

According to Robyn, given that more than 85% of business is generated directly from referrals and recommendations in most businesses, it’s certainly worth capitalising on this widely under-utilised source of income.

Imagine one client’s value is worth, say, $500 a year to you and you have 50 clients. If half of them (25 clients) recommended just one other person that year and they become a $500 client, you’ve just benefited from $12,500 extra revenue at no cost to you! And this is just one-off sales, not repeat sales … Puts the investment in on-line and off-line networking tools and groups into perspective doesn’t it?

Robyn’s produced many excellent books on effective networking, all of which are available from good book stores or her website: www.networkingtowin.com.au. The title of her book ‘Network or Perish’ pretty much says it all.

If you get the opportunity to hear her in person, make sure you do. I can highly recommend her!

Hands-up anyone who’s bought Microsoft’s new Vista operating system. Ok, hands-up anyone who knows of anyone who’s bought it?

I’m guessing there won’t be too many hands in the air. Herald technology writer Peter Griffin was pragmatic in his recent comments which included

“…(it) will be a couple of years before this version takes off.”

And vice-president of Internet NZ, blogger David Farrar, also had reservations, noting:

“I usually wait for six months after a Microsoft product comes out before I try it because there are usually some bugs in there.”

And there’s the rub. Regardless of the hype and promotional activities announcing the shiny new software, I bet it’s not exactly running off retailers shelves. Why? Because it has a major hurdle to overcome – Microsoft’s reputation for the first version of anything it releases being full of bugs – just as David Farrar said.

On the plus side, Microsoft overwhelmingly dominates the global market in terms of software on the vast majority of home and work computers so it can probably afford to wait until people upgrade and end up getting Vista by default when it’s pre-loaded onto their machines pre-purchase. In the meantime, I’ll leave it up to the ‘early adopters’ to let Microsoft know what and where the holes are and hopefully, by the time version 2 or 3 or 2010 comes out, it’ll be worth the wait.

When it’s totally unqualified! I had a (long) conversation with a pretty persistent tele-sales rep yesterday who started by congratulating me on being nominated to become a member of their travel rewards club. Gee thanks.

Apparently, someone I know has become a member and the club asks every new member to nominate at least one other person they think may also benefit. Referral marketing in action – recommendation and ‘feel-good’ reinforcement:

“You’ve made a really good decision becoming a member – who else do you recommend we approach?”

This, of course, generates apparently semi-qualified leads for virtually no additional effort. Smart marketing – in theory. The tele-sales person’s opening line to me was:

“Such & Such has recommended I call you to outline the benefits of … as he thinks you’ll benefit too”.

Now, it’s much easier to say a straight ‘No thanks’ to a complete stranger, calling out of the blue, about something I may or may not have any interest in or need for. But they didn’t use this tactic. They gained a (slightly) warmer response from me initially as the first thought that went through my mind was “I know and trust Such & Such, therefore, maybe this is worth listening to.” There was also a momentary thought of “… and they recommended me! Gee that’s nice of them.”

Flattery goes a long way towards reducing purchase resistance. However, it started to go downhill from here-on-in as the tele-sales person failed to check whether I did, indeed, have a need or want for the product they were selling. Instead, she proceeded to list all the benefits and savings – at length.

The bottom line was I wasn’t in the market to purchase. I have no need or want for the product and no amount of telling me how fabulous it is, and what the member benefits are, is going to change this. When I explained this to her she kept repeating how only nominated members get these benefits (flattery again) and that she felt Such & Such wouldn’t have recommended me if I couldn’t benefit from them.

The psychological pressure to agree with her was pretty high. “How could I let Such & Such down? Will he think less of me if I don’t join him in this exclusive club? He’s a smart guy, maybe I will be missing out on something worth having etc. etc. etc?” Amazing how I found myself thinking these things and having to argue my case with someone trying to sell me a product I didn’t need or want.

Personal referrals and recommendations are a hugely powerful way of acquiring leads for possible future sales in an incredibly time and cost-effective way. However, that’s all they are – leads. The basics of establishing the propensity to purchase are crucial.

I found it interesting how important the issue of trust figured in the whole equation and how well the company used this to their advantage. I’m sure they convert many previously ‘cold’ prospects into shiny new members using exactly the process outlined.

Am I irritated by the call or think any less of Such & Such for passing on my contact details to them? For me personally – no. Clearly, asking existing members to nominate others is the primary way this company recruits new members and they can be pretty persuasive! However it didn’t work in my case – I’m not becoming a member. I wasn’t, for all intents and purposes, a good referral.

So how can we give great referrals?

1. Establish a need / want. Ensure the person you’re referring has a need or want in the first place.

2. Outline the possible solution. Explain how the provider’s product / services have benefited you in your own terms.

3. Gain permission to make the referral. Ensure the person you’re referring is happy for you to refer them to the possible provider.

4. ‘Rate’ the referral. Let the provider know the likely level of interest / propensity to engage the referree has so the provider can follow-up appropriately.

5. Confirm the referral’s been made. Let the person you’re referring know you’ve passed on the referral and can expect contact from the provider.

6. Follow up. Contact the person you’re referring several days or weeks later to ascertain whether they’ve been contacted by the company and find out what the outcome is.

By following these simple steps the person you’re referring is more likely to feel cared for and valued and the relationship between you is likely to be enhanced. It also makes the job of the company you referred them to easier as they can respond appropriately and spend precious time and resources on those most likely to purchase in order of priority.

If a referral’s worth doing, it’s worth doing well.

A letter to the editor in this weekend’s New Zealand Herald touched on the subject of awards and commendations – specifically recipients of the New Year Honours. The letter noted: “… (actors like) Sam Neil may be very successful at what they do, (but) what else has he done to receive his award? Has he made a real difference to other people’s lives? Surely this should be the criterion for receiving an honour.”

And therein lies the crux. Awards and commendations certainly acknowledge achievement in one form or another. They also frequently add a level of credibility and enhance a person’s reputation in the context within which they are given.

I’d hazard a guess that almost everyone who’s ever received an award or commendation has probably genuinely earned and deserved it within their field of expertise or activity. The esteem in which it’s held by others, however, will be judged subjectively depending on whether they themselves ascribe any value to the contribution made.

Sporting, community, professional, academic and the myriad of other awards presented every year are wonderful to receive and should be applauded for what they are. They don’t, however, make others’ contribution any less valid or worthwhile. Indeed, in some cases, awards can be virtually valueless depending on who’s making the award and the basis upon which it is made.

It’s certainly worth checking the credibility of an award and the process by which the recipient is determined – especially when making comparative assessments between service providers. A little desk-research will quickly reveal whether that glowing accolade really carries as much weight as it appears to.

And of course the fact that someone received an award or commendation several years ago doesn’t necessarily mean they’re up with the pace now. Times change – again, check the facts.

I personally enjoy acknowledging and celebrating the winning of an award with those receiving them and feel awards generally provide a useful benchmark against which others can be compared. They also often raise the bar in terms of innovation and performance which is also a good thing. But awards certainly aren’t the be-all and end-all. They are – or should be – a (lovely) by-product of an ongoing commitment to consistent delivery and acting with integrity.

For those of you who haven’t yet tried the new-look NZ Herald online it’s certainly worth a look and is a big improvement on the previous site.

Ana Samways’ ‘Sideswipe’ is now on the home page and I was delighted to see extracts from emails sent to Telecom’s Santaline included there today. A handful of comments are published – all worth reading – but this one particularly caught my eye: “Dear Santa, I don’t want much, just something nice for mum and something nice for me as we can’t afford Christmas this year and I know that upsets my mum but I’m okay with it.” Given my post on Monday about judgements often made around Christmas gifts it’s heartening to see the true spirit of Christmas alive and well amongst many children and young people.

It’s great to see too that the little dog Job (pronounced Jobe), rescued by Auckland SPCA from horrendous neglect and cruelty, is improving as a result of the dedicated care of SPCA staff and an outpouring of support from the public. The TradeMe auction of a limited edition signed All Blacks jersey, generously donated by Alan Johnson of Insignia International, raised $4,000 towards Job’s appeal and many more donations continue to be received by the SPCA in support of this wee pup and others in need. (The comments from TradeMe members on this auction are well worth reading.)

If you are able to make a donation to the SPCA this Christmas, however small, please do so. It’s the perfect gift: no shopping involved, no wrapping required and absolutely no judgement as to the value or appropriateness of the gift. Whatever is donated is always, always, warmly and genuinely received with the deepest gratitude. And that’s what Christmas is truly about.

As Mum to two adopted little dogs from rescue centres – one that had been abandoned and injured and one that had been abused – I know only too well that all that really counts is kindness, compassion and trust. Perhaps, if we all quietly donated to at least one charity this Christmas – financially or in-kind – there may be a little less fear, abuse and neglect in 2007 and a little more compassion, hope and gratitude.

Wikipedia, the world’s largest online encyclopaedia, came in for a hammering in Saturday’s New Zealand Herald. Given that its content is made up entirely by its users supplying and editing content in real time (who may or may not be experts on the topic they’re writing about), a strong ‘tread with caution’ theme came through.

Fair enough, but I personally find wikis generally, and Wikipedia itself, an informative, and often entertaining, mine of information. What’s most interesting to me is how widely ‘pop culture’ is commented on. Wikipedia provides a ‘potted history’ of current opinions and facts across a wide range of topics of relevance to me as a marketer. And because the entries are updated in real time by any number of contributors, it’s a great way of cutting through the promotional and other spiel ‘official websites’ usually contain. For example, a search using the word ‘Google’ brings up a wealth of information about the company, including the following summary information:

Type Public (NASDAQ: GOOG), (LSE: GGEA)
Founded Menlo Park, California (September 27, 1998)
Headquarters Mountain View, California, USA
Key people
Eric E. Schmidt, CEO/Director
Sergey Brin, Technology President
Larry E. Page, Products President
George Reyes, CFO
Industry Internet
Products See list of Google services and tools
Revenue $6.138 Billion USD (2005)
Net income $1.465 Billion USD (2005)
Employees 9,378 (September 30, 2006)[1]
Website www.google.com

Fantastic! Instant info. What a great time-saver. It also provides a large number of references, recommended further reading and external links. I absolutely agree its contents should not be taken at face value, but corroborated from other sources as appropriate. But then this goes for any published material doesn’t it? The links within entries are particularly useful, making Wikipedia something of a refined search engine – again, helpful to marketers and researchers.

An extract from the entry on Wikipedia itself reads: Bill Thompson, a well known technology writer, commented that the debate is probably symptomatic of much learning about information which is happening in society today, arguing that:

“It is the same with search engine results. Just because something comes up in the top 10 on MSN Search or Google does not automatically give it credibility or vouch for its accuracy or importance… One benefit that might come from the wider publicity that Wikipedia is currently receiving is a better sense of how to evaluate information sources… The days when everything you saw on a screen had been carefully filtered, vetted, edited and checked are long gone. Product placement, advertorials and sponsorship are all becoming more common. An educated audience is the only realistic way to ensure that we are not duped, tricked, fleeced or offended by the media we consume, and learning that online information sources may not be as accurate as they pretend to be is an important part of that education. I use the Wikipedia a lot. It is a good starting point for serious research, but I would never accept something that I read there without checking.”

I’m with you Bill.