Think Inside The Box

Our documents and dog and pony shows move from laptops to DVDs  to thumb drives and back, changing to new revisions as they go. So how do we share and collaborate on multi-megabyte presentations and how do we get our stuff back, when something happens to our previously trusty gadget? A still common practice is carpet bomb email. Send attachments of everything to everyone and repeat whenever someone modifies on comments on anything. To the extent such an approach works, it does so by ignoring many of the comments and modifications as the project deadline approaches.

There are far better ways and a range of solutions for collaboration and back up. We might even used one, if it is convenient and easy enough.

To forestall disaster, as well as enhance collaboration, I’ve been looking for a better way. There are a plethora of them – as if you had time to learn a new system, when the presentation is this afternoon. In fact, there are some light weight useful tools. Here’s my take on some of the leading options.

Services such as Live Mesh, Sugar Sync, and Mozy require you to install local software. My tests of these found them with more features than needed and therefore more complex, less intuitive, and slower performing. Their costs include a learning curve.

I found three utilities, which were elegant, simple and sufficient for storing, sharing and collaborating on documents. Like Google Docs and SalesForce.com, my preferred systems are “No Software” software. That is, there is nothing for you to install or maintain. In the current buzzphrase, they are in the Cloud. They work through the web browser. This means that they work with PC, Mac, Linux, smartphone and tablet. I list them order of my preference.

Box.net

Box is simple, fast, and elegant. Everything you need to know is on one clean screen. Create an account, upload and share files, collaborate and comment. A 5 GB personal account is free, while a 3 user account with 500 GB of working storage is $15 per month. The site was quite usable on a web-enables smart phone through its standard browser, but a bit easier through the free app.

Amazon

Amazon’s Cloud Drive, looks and works like the file management system on a computer. If you can find and save a file on your computer, you more or less know how to use Cloud Drive. The free version includes 5 GB of storage. If you buy music from Amazon, it is automatically stored on your Cloud Drive for free in addition to the 5 GB. Additional storage costs $1 per GB per year. It’s a breeze to use on a computer, but awkward to use on the very small screen of a smartphone. Cloud Drive is not currently accessible through any of Amazon’s apps.

OpenDrive

OpenDrive is a hybrid service. Online storage and file sharing are available over the web, but advanced collaboration and backup features require downloading  software to your own computer. A 5 GB account is free and multi-user paid accounts with 100 GB start at $50 per year. The interface is clean and intuitive. In my tests, uploading PDF and Word files took longer than with Cloud Drive or Box.net.

Any of these services are handy for storing and sharing content. Now your thumb drive can have a thumb drive.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Happiness in a Box

What business are you in? Phrased another way, what do your customers buy – really?

One of my vacation reads was Tony Hsieh’s Delivering Happiness. The book is a widely ranging narrative of how a young programmer and frequent quaffer of Red Bull made an early bonanza, became an angel investor and gradually developed a notion of management. He distilled all of these through the school of hard knocks to transform his company, Zappos, into a leading direct apparel merchant and a brand which delivers more than the shoes and clothing it sells.

Hsieh and his team did not do this by running a lean, mean profit maximizing machine. They experimented continuously, paid well, staffed fully, rejected outsourcing, invested in a large domestic call center and abandoned a cost efficient out sourced drop-shipping model to take on the risk and expense of carrying a vast inventory.

Rather than use brute force marketing such as offering large discounts or spending heavily on advertising, SEO and promotion, Hsieh transformed Zappos into a customer service powerhouse. He marketed better by marketing less. The result in many cases is to deliver an experience, which not only satisfies but “Wows” the customer. Thus Zappos can claim to deliver “happiness” while also delivering profits. How does he do it?

Zappos has an excellent ecommerce website, but its core channel is, surprisingly for this day and age, the telephone. Zappos achieves customer intimacy through highly trained and carefully selected phone representatives and embedding them in a culture which honors their role. No minimum wage remote call centers in a low wage country here.

The phone experience is paramount for Zappos, such that every employee regardless of job goes through call center training. Unlike so many firms, the call center is not treated as just an expense to be minimized. Reps do not have a quota and can spend as much time as they wish on a call. They are empowered to deal with customer issues as they think appropriate and may dispense additional benefits such as upgrades to free overnight shipping. They can learn a great deal about customers and use this knowledge in growing their business. Their customers feel as if they’re being wooed. That’s delivering happiness.

The concepts which built Zappos are simple, so why don’t more organizations apply them to deliver happiness to their customers and profits to their stockholders? In essence, Zappos has a different business model: Dote on the customer, engage her in conversation and capture what you learn from these conversations. She will pay full price and tell her friends about it.

This approach requires the courage and commitment of making continuous long term risky investments and deferring short term profitability. It also requires dedicated leadership to build and maintain a culture of customer focus and continuous innovation.

Many firms, including some I’ve worked for and consulted to, have flirted with Zappos’ approach with clichés about how they value customers and staff. They abandon it with the first dip in quarterly earnings or the next article they read in a business magazine. It’s too hard and too disciplined for most companies.

If it can’t be like Zappos, what does your organization do to foster customer intimacy?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Sound of One Hand Claquing

The opinion of others is often important when choosing a product – be it a restaurant, a dentist or a pair of running shoes. Social media have further amplified the reach of such opinion. There are dedicated review sites such as Yelp, Zagat, Angie’s List or TripAdvisor; but reviews are now common elsewhere such as on shopping sites..

Search for products on Amazon, REI and LLBean and you’ll find ratings and reviews. Even retail store focused merchants such as Target and Walmart now have online product ratings and shoppers can view products from highest to lowest rated.

 

Reviews are potentially more credible than ads or sellers’ endorsements, so there is a temptation to manipulate them. This is hardly new. What is novel is the emergence of sites, whose primary purpose is to recruit visitors to give inflated reviews. Essentially these are sites designed to hire claques.

The problem is sufficiently broad to have engendered a study from computer scientists at Cornell on Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam and a recent review in the technology blog of the New York Times.

Biased reviews are a hazard for opinion sites, which risk becoming irrelevant if the market perceives them as fronts for sellers. Cooked reviews are also a threat to businesses, whose competitors buy fictional praise for themselves or induce others to give dishonestly negative ratings to their rivals.

What can a marketer do when confronted with phony reviews from rivals?

Now more than ever, monitoring social media to track your company and your competition should be part of your normal ongoing market research. You need to track your ratings and those of your cohort. This does not have to be expensive. You can do a lot with free tools, such as Google Alerts, Twitter Search and Social Mention. Should you want more than the free services provide, there are also a number of proprietary offerings such as Traktur, Radian6 and
BrandsEye.

If you genuinely have raving fans, make this known through YouTube interviews, news releases, use cases, and a testimonials section on your company website (with enough detail to be credible). Highlighting genuine praise may speak louder than 3.7 stars on Amazon.

If you have genuine criticisms, use them to understand and fix what bugs your customers. This is a great way to convert them into fans.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Sullying The Brand

It takes time, effort, ingenuity and often luck to create a strong brand. Not so with the reverse. It’s much easier to damage a brand and squander its equity, which has taken years to amass. This is painfully illustrated by the brand of the United States and its traditional AAA credit rating.

The US has had Triple A credit since 1917 – about the time it emerged as a world power, enacted a federal income tax, and played the decisive role in World War I. Since then, through recession, depression, and war, US Bonds were about the safest investment one could buy.

Back in the day when I was in B-school, normative finance spoke of “risk-free” assets and equated these with Treasury Bills. Perhaps this was an academic formalization of clichés such as “sound as a dollar.” Not any more.

Even if the US avoids an actual default, much damage has already been done. Indeed, the embarrassing process involved in raising the debt ceiling has added to reputational damage even as it resolved the crisis of running out of borrowing authority. The very fact that rating agencies will carefully review the credit worthiness of US debt is unprecedented and already dents the brand. The actual downgrade by Standard & Poors, simply confirms the problem. Thus, in spite of Europe’s own financial debacle, the dollar remains weak vs. the euro.

US Dollar vs Euro

The American Colonies finished the Revolutionary War deeply indebted. The founders, led by Alexander Hamilton, realized that credit worthiness would greatly enhance the reputation and prospects of the new nation. They endured the hardship of repayment and set a precedent we have followed with great advantage until very recently.

The initial response of the Treasury Department of arguing with credit rating analysts is essentially beside the point. Unlike corporate disasters such as BP or News Corp., the brand-bending embarrassment of the US budget crisis is one that no finite amount of social media, PR, or Marcom – let alone political spin – is likely to fix.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Lies, Damn Lies, and Bugs

Apple is the world’s most valuable technology company – $ 322 billion as of this writing. Despite threats, ranging from parts shortages to the health of its leader, it has had quite a run. It has done this by bucking conventional wisdom and marketing practices.

Apple doesn’t blog, tweet, have a Facebook page, issue forecasts, and in general refuses to announce what it is going to do. Its news releases have been invariably about what has already happened and regularly declines to comment on where it’s going.

Being secretive has served Apple well. It increases interest and reduces promotional expense. Yet there are times when stone walling won’t cut it. One of these is the recent revelation that its products such as iPhones and iPads have been storing users’ locations in a database. Moreover, contrary to Apple’s previous assurances, location information is collected even when the user has turned off location services.

After waiting a week, Apple attributed the persistent storage of location information to a “bug.” It then released a Q and A on its use of location data, which was neither clear nor reassuring.

“Bugs” typically refer to errors in design or code such that the system does not work as intended or has undesired side effects. One or even a series of bugs do not cause a database to be created and transmitted, so the explanation is unconvincing.

When I was in the software biz, use of the term “bug” – the B-word as it was euphemized – was taboo. Often it serves as an epithet – as when Apple declined to support Adobe Flash on its iPhone and iPad because they claimed it’s “buggy.”

Apparently, when caught with its corporate knickers down, Apple punted not with an apology but a self-deprecating, we too have bugs. This not only failed to alleviate privacy concerns, but was eerily familiar of another denial. The infamous “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”

I’m shocked, shocked …

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment