The Invisible Marketing Blog

This week in Twitter: 2010-09-02

Christie Turner — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 22:09:00 +0000

wordpress gems – good session. #opencamp #
likes the 30min session length. U can tell fast if a spkr prepped, has value 2 share #opencamp #
vid (youtube) is high value for seo. #opencamp #
lots of nonprofits, churches here. Who can't afford to ask hard questions re security of a productivity tool? #opencamp #
seo is a lot more complicated than it was in 1996. So are projectors. #opencamp #
level10, interesting tech for drupal seo. Wonder how u do this is wordpress. #opencamp #
'embed anything' to help monetize content. An early concept, for licensing images & dont mind ads all over yr site. #dfwoc #
lots re attracting www traffic. But what counts? Convert traffic to results (usu $). #dfwoc #
track how ppl use yr content: tynt. What's copied, where they put it. #dfwoc #
slideshare, the conference proceedings book extraordinaire. #dwfoc #
woopra: real time web stats. How u can use that: Vsellis.com/woop #dfwoc #
cloud vs native (installed on a cmptr) apps. At home, ppl r moving to cloud. #dfwoc #
woopra: u can chat w.visitors to yr site thru this (not just) analytics app. #dfwoc #
it's easier to take notes w.twitter at a conference than w.laptop. Unless it's a really meaty session. #dfwoc #
after 5p, the speakers talk faster. #dfwoc #
why develop for mobile? The #s (yr site traffic) ought to make that easy to decide. #dfwoc #
ppt viewed in a ballroom or breakout session is near unreadable w.dark backgrounds. #dfwoc #
taxonomy, content strategy important for usability of site & seo. (good session) #dfwoc #
taxonomy: organize info in ways that give it meaning. #dfwoc #
u can really tell a presenter who thinks to help an audience process their info. Vs those who just spew what they know. #dfwoc #
vitaminui.org – new css framework incorp html5. #dfwoc @eliehoury #
all html rendered grphcs in css3 can be emulated on older platforms, cross brwsr compatible. #dfwoc #
renderng graphx in css3 is faster/easier to implement & transforms for mobile display. #
rendering speed on older brwsrs = slower. Crash prone. #dfwoc #
css3 = avail in most current browsers & mobile platforms. Firefox, ie9, android, chrome, opera, safari… #
twickie. Crowdsrcd code. Save/export twittr conversations, searches. #dfwoc #
the fascination of the internet: communicating. @chrispirillo #dfwoc #
holding on to ideas u can't execute = worthless. Know what u can't do. #dfwoc #
this session is not about its stated topic, but about the presenter. Occupational hazard of conferencegoing. #
commerce doesn't just flow naturally from communities of interest. Someone has to ask for money. #
blog=nexus. Keep all your content there. #opencamp #
people don't want advertising. The content is the marketing, bc it builds relationships. #ocdfw #
it's easy to b distracted by the logistics of putting content online. Actual objectives: links, subscibers, action. That's influence. #ocdfw #
loved the copyblogger preso with brian clark. #ocdfw #
excellent session. Social seo for content marketing. #ocdfw #
taking a break at #opencamp #
30min time slots=unforgiving of technical difficulties. #ocdfw #
a small, targeted, engaged audience is more valuable to most businesses than a vast generic list of names. #ocdfw #
good preso re content asset mgmt, @suredoc . #ocdfw #
Welcome, new followers from Opencamp! Glad to know you. #ocdfw #
Eating the elephant with a massive lead nurture design project… having a lot of content assets = good problem. #
Thanks for the listings! @marnafriedman @CompetProspects @marriottmurdock @theZOMM @OCDFW @offback #

Is 22 Tweets-Per-Day the Optimum? A Twittercurmudgeon mumbles.

This week in Twitter: 2010-08-19

Christie Turner — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Making viral video? Think like a VC or film producer… http://dld.bz/r7dV #
There are no Magic Beans for Data Quality http://www.ocdqblog.com/home/there-are-no-magic-beans-for-data-quality.html #

This week in Twitter: 2010-07-22

Christie Turner — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Trying to sync 3 email/PIM accounts on new Nokia E72. Gmail works OK. Google Apps is 50/50. Mail for Exchange = *$%($#)%$#!!!! #
I'm attending OpenCamp Dallas 2010 — http://opencamp.eventbrite.com #

This week in Twitter: 2010-07-08

Christie Turner — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Combating the forces of evil. #

This week in Twitter: 2010-07-01

Christie Turner — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Board meeting next week. Prep time. #
Not the biggest fan of this hailstorm. #
Congrats on recent FC article! @lincolnmurphy http://budurl.com/3jge #
John Hussman: It's Official, The Data Says Another Recession Is Coming http://bit.ly/aWDUFD #
"The oil spill: Your solutions" + responses by petroleum engineering at Unv of Southern Calif. Fascinating. http://bit.ly/9Ixylr #
RT @marketingprofs Do.Not.Write.Like.This. Ever. http://bit.ly/bi2iEw #
board mtg successfully completed. no one got voted off. getting a start on my to-dos… #

This week in Twitter: 2010-06-24

Christie Turner — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Thanks for the retweets! @marketingNsales @SalesAssessment @NickdeCent ##ff #

Can humanizing your brand increase sales?

Christie Turner — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:04:37 +0000

It’s easy to simply dismiss all branding as a constructed image, no relationship with reality. Most people with power to spend money do know that brands are constructed with an agenda: influence people to spend money. At least intellectually, we know that brands intend to produce a rather specific outcome, and it isn’t the greater good.

Now, the most powerful brands tap into a reality we want to believe. The human brain has a tough time resisting an offer which appeals to beliefs we already hold about the world, how the world should be, or ourselves.

We want the NYPD and the US Army to be like Iron Man: efficiently killing off the bad guys, inerrantly knowing who they are, and sparing everyone else — all with beautiful technological accuracy that’s much more surgical and correct than mere human judgment. Such desires are common among post-9-11 Americans, and this zeitgeist is a secret of the power of all three of these brands.

All 3 brands have also been humanized for us to some degree. NYPD by stark and heroic images related to 9-11 and the defense of the city since. The US Army by our proximity to many of its faces through our family, friends, school or work colleagues, fellow travelers in our airports, and extensive news coverage. Iron Man by Robert Downey, Jr., and the famous movies.

Even brands that should take what they do seriously and exert a vibe of trustworthiness and confidence (the NYPD, my accountant, the NSA) don’t seem credible without a human side.

Yet many executives believe that humanizing their brands will actually cost them credibility.

We won’t seem as big. (You also won’t seem as distant.)
We won’t seem competent. (A fake, constructed image of competence will seem more competent than you guys actually are?)
They’ll notice that we’re not invincible. (Most brands are expected to recover well. Perfection is a nice but optional extra.)

What really matters, of course, is whether humanizing the brand can increase sales.

Many fashion/consumer brands know that the answer is yes. Celebrity endorsements, done correctly, are one of the clearest proofs of this.

Is it also true B2B? Yes. How do I know? Because business to business buyers value word of mouth referrals, video testimonials, live customer references. They also know that such things aren’t foolproof (past results don’t guarantee future performance) and can even be faked. But how many of you hired your corporate lawyers or accountants from the Yellow Pages? Heck, no, you got referrals from people you trust. Even a Google or LinkedIn search result comes with more credibility than an ad.

Why? It’s a lot harder to get real human beings to stake their reputations on my company’s performance (by lending face and name to a reference) than to design a pretty image and make it say all the right things.

Content marketing is another part of humanizing the B2B brand. Let’s say I give you a preview of a company’s problem solving insights and approach as it tackles a problem similar to the one you face. Maybe it’s a Slideshare presentation or a conference breakout session or a blog post – doesn’t matter. What matters is that you can much better envision what it’s like to work with me based on that preview. No ad can accomplish this. Ads tell, which means they are self conscious messages. Content marketing shows what I understand about a problem, and how I approach solving it. It puts a real face on a real solution. This increases trust. It’s humanizing.

Muppets Selling for IBM – would it work today?

Christie Turner — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:25:25 +0000

This is laugh-out-loud funny. Especially love Kermit selling under pressure.

Nominal business observation: do you think this would work at your company’s meetings today? Many corporate executives want both the company’s and their own personal brands to have gravitas. The Muppets don’t bring gravitas to a brand, but they make it accessible.

More about brands, selling, and buyer influence on the blog. More of the IBM Muppets online at http://technologizer.com/2010/05/31/ibm-muppets/

Happy summer!

And now for something completely different: Invisible Marketing makes microloans through Kiva

Christie Turner — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 16:59:42 +0000

Invisible Marketing is now promoting global entrepreneurship through Kiva. (“Loans that change lives.”)

Through Kiva, we’re making microloans to small businesses throughout the world, especially woman-owned businesses in Latin America. Check out our lender page to see who we support.

Our motivations and actions defy every attempt at prediction, as any honest economist will admit. But people in community act in very interesting ways. Some patterns emerge. Some themes are possible. Here are a few observations of the Kiva community so far.

People in community who help each other can derive mutual benefit. Kiva creates such a community, and personally I’m joining to study it.
People are willing to help people, even with no obvious, direct benefit to themselves.
Helping another person tends to most greatly benefit a giver in ways which are impossible to predict upfront (a foundational principle of networking).
People are more likely to help others when the recipient is (1) accessible, but mediated by a step or two of removal (familiarity breeds contempt), (2) someone with whom I can relate in some way, (3) easy to help (4) at low risk to the donor.
Giving can be empowering, like shopping is for many people. Shopping for bargain investments on Kiva is at least as much fun as shopping for a good deal on shoes or laptops or anything else you can buy online. It’s a marketplace of possibility, where every loan could pay you back and many could even generate interest.

Parting thoughts about Kiva:

Staking $25 on someone’s business pitch is an acceptable risk. And we can see who we’re helping. It’s not foolproof, but chances are good that our money will get to the entrepreneurs who pitched their loan opportunities to us through the Kiva site. And the rest is up to those leaders to grow their businesses and pay us back.

The possibility of return of capital is compelling for a philanthropic venture. We will recycle the capital for future loans. I look forward to seeing what our interns will do with the portfolio in future months and years.

I want my company to be a triple-bottom-line oriented company. Real sustainability is good for brands, because it’s good for people (on whom brands depend). Kiva just gave me an easy tool to make the company more global and sustainable in focus.

And with weird risk premiums and rotten returns in every venue for invested capital, perhaps we will benefit more from this experiment in social capitalism than we think. In ways we do not expect.

Invisibility is holy grail or anathema in marketing?

Christie Turner — Mon, 24 May 2010 17:55:55 +0000

As I watch the Google Alerts pop up for my brand name, I am struck by two things.

1. Some affiliate marketing writers (who frankly sound half a step short of MLM’ers) have glommed onto the idea of invisible marketing being a terrible thing. Who wouldn’t want their name in lights?

2. Other marketing writers (who sound like SEO specialists) emphasize that invisibility is kind of a goal when marketing online.

I would argue that invisibility isn’t itself a goal for B2B marketing. Nor is visibility per se.

It’s good to be visible — to your prospects, to people who should have some interest in knowing you. In fact, it’s necessary to be visible to this group.

It’s good to be invisible, too. The idea is for your value to be visible. That means building content, building relationships, building trust, building something other than a big pile of robotic spin.

It’s for your target market to judge the value of what you do. Your job is to listen to the market as it responds to what you’re putting out there. Either it validates your position or it doesn’t. Whatever the response, you can only get better when you understand what your buyer values and figure out how to do more of what they value with your products and services.

Market-validated positioning, products, services, communication. Consistent and growing revenue. Those are valid goals for marketing.

Not who sees our marketing or knows that we’re marketing something. That’s called vanity marketing. In the B2B world, it doesn’t make money.

The one big problem that kills lead scoring programs

Christie Turner — Mon, 17 May 2010 20:21:29 +0000

I love lead scoring. When done right, it lets you think like a customer.

The problem is that it’s just too easy for marketers to think inside the box, instead of like customers.

Lead scoring programs are rather complex to set up. Certainly more so than a garden-variety email campaign. They require weighted averages, multiple decision criteria, campaign tools of some sophistication.

None of that is a reason not to do lead scoring.

But here’s the killer.

The predictive value of your scoring criteria.

Do you really, in fact, know why customers buy from you?

Or do you just think you know?

A lead scoring problem is an expensive, time consuming way to find out that what you really need to do is go find some customers and listen to them for a while and figure out how to have an intelligent conversation with them.

Here’s the dirty little secret. Many marketers want to score leads based on publicly available data which can be bought in bulk. Industry. Company size, revenue, # of employees. Public/private ownership status. Etc.

Then I add in a few other fill-in-the-blank data points like “how many widgets do you already own?” or “what brand of product/service X are you using today?”

Once I buy enough lists and add a couple of data points like this (the belief goes), I can score my leads, and voila! Qualified Leads, ready for eager consumption by my sales team.

Except that they’re not.

What IS a qualified lead is a much more complex and nuanced conversation than can be had with objective criteria like this. My job title may make me an interesting contact, but it doesn’t make me a warm lead or interested prospect.

Worthwhile lead scoring requires more. Until I understand how or why my buyer decides to buy, or at least what prompts them to look for a solution, I have no idea how to influence that buying decision or overcome buyer resistance. This knowledge is prerequisite for a credible lead scoring program.

This week in Twitter: 2010-05-13

Christie Turner — Thu, 13 May 2010 22:09:00 +0000

recently started reading the Harvard Business Review again, via Nook. Geeky business stuff. #

This week in Twitter: 2010-05-06

Christie Turner — Thu, 06 May 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Angry that Apple will shut down Lala (May 31). It's the only online music service I've ever loved. #

Relationships vs. Markets: 5 differences between sales and marketing

Christie Turner — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:53:38 +0000

At one time, the demarcation between sales and marketing was simpler.

Relationships were what sales needed:

One to one, person to person,
company by target account company,
highly situational, mano a mano.

That’s the world of selling.

Markets are what marketing tried to influence.

Given enough time and money, you could drive statistically measurable movements of trends and beliefs through populations, groups, industries.
As measurement tools & processes got better, revenue was attributed to the process as a whole, but most of the activities tended to lack accountability.

Well, if Marketing is on the hook to help drive this year’s revenue, it’s not quite so tidy as this. The problem is that moving trends and beliefs through populations is expensive to measure and takes a long time. It can’t be tracked very well to this year’s revenue at most companies.

Marketing increasingly gets involved in relationships. We identify prospective customers who may one day enter a buying process. We nurture early relationships with those prospects. We score prospects’ behaviors to determine who’s getting closer to that buying process. We look for ways to influence individual prospect relationships.

These activities do not make marketing more useful or accountable. To sales and marketing alike, this increasing convergence of focus can feel like a fight for data, control, and ownership. It may get harder to assign credit for results.

What makes the difference? Getting marketing people out of their ivory towers. Building internal relationships. And learning how to talk with customers.

This week in Twitter: 2010-04-22

Christie Turner — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 22:09:00 +0000

Using Smartsheet for Online Project Management, Task Management – vry pleased so far. http://www.smartsheet.com?u=QJ1150516 #