We've done more work on PhlooQ and we're excited to share progress. To the left, you'll see the new PhlooQ widget (now available with green accents and the new logo.)
We've also tweaked the logos a bit and come up with a new phlooq.com page.
Monday, November 10, 2008
New PhlooQ Stuff For Your Consideration
We've done more work on PhlooQ and we're excited to share progress. To the left, you'll see the new PhlooQ widget (now available with green accents and the new logo.)
Thursday, October 23, 2008
PhlooQ: Widget Winner
After weighing in all of the pros and cons, a finalist has been selected. The PhlooQ team and the web community really gravitated towards the open, approachable look and feel of the widget above. Everyone found the "maybe state" a welcomed addition and also emphasized a strong desire for natural looking hands in lieu digital versions. We're happy with the overall direction. Next on the agenda, redesigning the website.
Monday, October 13, 2008
PhlooQ Widgets: Round 1
Our first iteration of the PhlooQ widget is here and we'd love you to comment. In general, we'd attempted to translate the users' commitment to the event into a binary yes or no answer - but we're not clear if that's the right approach - perhaps we need to introduce a 'maybe' state?
View the widgets over at liftagency
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
PhlooQ: How The Widget Works Part II
From a publisher standpoint, the PhlooQ widget works as illustrated above. The event publisher sends updates through PhlooQ to the attendees who can view it via one of the three PhlooQ widgets: the mobile widget, the web-based widget or through Facebook.
From the widget, the user can update their status, invite and chat with members or their social graph and register their interest in the event. From a PhlooQ system standpoint an update is sent to Facebook with links back to the event publisher's site.
Facebook interaction with PhlooQ happens at three levels; Updates in which PhlooQ updates Facebook with your status or comments, notifications sent through Facebook to your social graph (even to those who aren't PhlooQ users) and as an interface to the PhlooQ system.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
PhlooQ: How It Works
At its core PhlooQ is quite simple (from a user interaction standpoint) but there is complexity which comes in what makes it tick and what it does below the surface.
Two more illustrations over at liftagency.com
Thursday, October 02, 2008
PhlooQ Identity
Part of PlhooQ's coming out might be a new (or updated) Identity.. Or maybe not.. We've put together two options in addition to the original, and if you've got any ideas, please let us know - this should be a collaborative process.
So here's what we were thinking
We asked a few friends and family what they thought of the existing PhlooQ logo (the gray and orange one) and while no one had anything overly negative to say about it just about everyone thought the company was pronounced "Floo Cue" not "Fluke". We thought de-emphasizing the Q might be the correct approach.
We spoke with David about this and he explained why there was a large "Q" there in the first place; it looks a bit like a magnifying glass - the now universally accepted symbol for 'search' and 'explore' so we played with making the "Q" a more literal magnifying glass.
So What Do you Think?
So, do you think we're heading down a good path here? Even if these new logo concepts aren't perfect, are they an improvement, and what could we do to evolve them even more?
Next Up: The new PhlooQ widget - stay tuned!
FROM TARA HUNT: 2 SETS OF 10 COMMANDMENTS TO BECOME A BEACON IN THE MARKETPLACE (Plus 7 ways to embrace the chaos)
Loved Tara Hunt's talk. Trying to embrace her thinking at PhlooQ and elsewhere. I did not catch all 5 of her larger messages but she did provide lists along the way that supported her talk. I captured a few of these lists here: 2 SETS OF 10 COMMANDMENTS TO BECOME A BEACON IN THE MARKETPLACE (Plus 7 ways to embrace the chaos...)
The ten commandments of listening to a social network conversation:
1. Listen to experts but design for novices...
2. What people want and what they say they want is very different...know the difference.
3. Thou shalt respond to feedback even when you need to say "No thanks."
4. Don't take negative feedback personally.
5. Give credit to people whose ideas you use or integrate.
6. Flag even small changes you make to alert your users...
7. Make small incremental iterative changes rather than hold off for big ones.
8. Realize simplest improvements make biggest improvements: button shape change, color change. A 10 pixel change can make all the difference.
9. Remove the corporate ego--its about them and their needs not you.
10. Avoid consensus. It guarantees mediocrity.
The ten commandments of creating great product experiences:
1. Pay close attention to details
2. Go above and beyond: Zappos looks at Virgin and goes beyond...
3. Appeal to emotion and nostalgia
4. Be a social catalyst: connect your customers to each other
5. Inject fun into your product
6. Experiment and be agile. Try little things all the time.
7. Turn banality into something fashionable: sexy toothpaste!
8. Design for flow! Think of "games" as a framing device.
9. Let people personalize. I am unique just like everyone else!
10. Make happiness your business model.
7 Ways to embrace the chaos:
1. Stop moving and look around until you see everything clearly
2. Transfer the knowledge: transparency produces better ideas from the marketplace
3. Every time you feel anxiety, acknowledge it
4. Define your own measure of success
5. Get outside of your personal circle
6. Realize that everything is out of your control
7. Have patience
Find your purpose: do well by doing good.
Some tips on where to look to find your purpose:
1. Try democratizing something...
2. Open it up...
3. Build bridges...
4. Spread love...
5. Value something bigger than yourself...
When I look ever these lists I can't help but I think PhlooQ can help others "maximize their social capital." Man, to be able to help people "listen," "create great experiences through engagement,"and to help people "build bridges & spread love"...now that would be going from (to twist an old term) "from good to great."
So now what?
Saturday, September 27, 2008
LiftAgency + PhlooQ: Getting our bearings
After about an hour's worth of discovery time, mostly spent hammering David with questions, we've sketched out how PhlooQ is going to function (and how we're going to communicate how it works visually). This is an important first step and one that often times is overlooked in the haste to bring a seemingly endless stream of web 2.0 products to market.
PhlooQ is deceptively simple.
Upon first glance PhlooQ may appear to be a bit uhhh.. complex. It features a mobile phone activation system, Facebook integration, phone call initiation as well as messaging directly from the widget screen and there is proposed future functionality that will extend even farther. Here's the thing though: at the end of the day PhlooQ actually simplifies event participation, network collaboration and communication through its unique approach. Interaction with the PhlooQ widget is seamless and requires little special instruction and that's why we think we're on to something here. It's simple and powerful and has the potential to make a real impact.
We're going to work on a sketch of the PhlooQ service offering and post it here soon, so stay tuned and tell us what you think.
PhlooQ is deceptively simple.
Upon first glance PhlooQ may appear to be a bit uhhh.. complex. It features a mobile phone activation system, Facebook integration, phone call initiation as well as messaging directly from the widget screen and there is proposed future functionality that will extend even farther. Here's the thing though: at the end of the day PhlooQ actually simplifies event participation, network collaboration and communication through its unique approach. Interaction with the PhlooQ widget is seamless and requires little special instruction and that's why we think we're on to something here. It's simple and powerful and has the potential to make a real impact.
We're going to work on a sketch of the PhlooQ service offering and post it here soon, so stay tuned and tell us what you think.
Friday, September 26, 2008
SLIDE RANCH "Where the Bay Area Gets Down to Earth" NEEDS YOUR HELP
Friends, family, colleagues, I am asking you to attend the Slide Ranch / Richard Louv Event as listed here at the Slide Ranch web site: http://www.slideranch.org/programs/events.html
Slide has pre-purchased 1000$ of tickets for this event that they need to sell in order to cover their costs.
They have not sold their quota and as a small non-profit even $1000 dollars can make a huge difference!
So, if you see this post, go to their events page and see the details of the Richard Louv event and "express interest" via the PhlooQ widget (the big Q) and this will spread the word to your social graph!
Or, just use this one:
Even better call them up and buy a ticket!
Richard Louv has written a great book and whether you have children or not the sentiment here is spot on for the moment. As the world seems to be in constant volatility around us: the financial mess, politics, the war, we forget that we are here on an earth that is infinitely beautiful and that our children need us to guide them to that beauty and connect them with it! This is core to the Slide Ranch mission and it is core to Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods." Help Slide Ranch help children.
LIFT AGENCY TO BLOG ABOUT PHLOOQ WEB DESIGN PROJECT
Lift Agency will be documenting their design project with PhlooQ. They have agreed to blog about their process, their progress, and the products they produce as they produce them.
You can see Lift Agency's first blog post about working with PhlooQ here: LiftAgency + PhlooQ: ...And We're Off!
This is pretty exciting! As we will be moving the site forward and sharing our progress in that regard as we go. This makes me giddy! To operate transparently is I think unusual--though likely not unique. I'll look to see how many other start-ups have put their process and progress out into the blogosphere.
This is an opportunity to engage partners, employees, customers and users in this movement forward. To engage with open ears as much as anything...sharing our trials and tribulations is really a desire to get the conversation started and keep the dialogue open!
I am so grateful for Lift Agency's desire to participate in this transparency with PhlooQ!
You can see Lift Agency's first blog post about working with PhlooQ here: LiftAgency + PhlooQ: ...And We're Off!
This is pretty exciting! As we will be moving the site forward and sharing our progress in that regard as we go. This makes me giddy! To operate transparently is I think unusual--though likely not unique. I'll look to see how many other start-ups have put their process and progress out into the blogosphere.
This is an opportunity to engage partners, employees, customers and users in this movement forward. To engage with open ears as much as anything...sharing our trials and tribulations is really a desire to get the conversation started and keep the dialogue open!
I am so grateful for Lift Agency's desire to participate in this transparency with PhlooQ!
Thursday, September 25, 2008
LiftAgency + PhlooQ: ...And We're Off!
As David mentioned in his post yesterday, our design firm liftagency llc will be working with PhlooQ to do a new user interface and appearance, and we're taking the extra step of sharing the process with anyone who cares to participate.
A Bit About liftagency
We like to consider ourselves a different type of design firm and one that has firmly embraced the web 2.0 communication methodology of rapid access to information - even if it's not 100% perfect. We've worked on a number of interface projects and been involved with re-designs of all sizes and scales and we are excited to be working with PhlooQ. Onward and upward.
Our Process As It Pertains To PhlooQ
The first step in this, and any, successful design project is to completely understand the scope of the project and to this end we'll be doing a working session with the PhlooQ team in which we hope to build out some sketches of the final product - we'll call this 'step one', and once we've got something visual to share with the team, we'll post it for the world to see.
Next, we'll develop a series of interaction maps (wireframes) which will represent the components we'll be building out - this step will allow us to finalize the position of each interaction point (buttons, fields etc..)
The third step has us delivering fully realized graphical compositions which will form the basis for the new PhlooQ, and we're going to be excited to get your reactions.
Be sure to stop by this blog, and liftagency.com for further details as we document the entire process.
PRODUCT DESIGN BASED ON BUYER FEEDBACK: PHLOOQ TO IMPLEMENT GREENMOMS.COM UI SUGGESTIONS
The smartest product builders in the world are not smarter than the marketplace. Sometimes the marketplace takes innovation and drives into places one would never expect. Sometimes the marketplace explains to you the small refinements that will make ALL the difference.
GREENMOMS.COM will be going live later this fall. We love the social responsibility, green, and community space. This sector of the Web publishing space is DYNAMIC. The publishers are going wild getting up sites and organizing events and announcing get togethers. For this reason we love that Janice Solimeno & Melinda MacNaughton the co-founders of GREENMOMS will be going live with PhlooQ's widget on their events page!
As she has worked toward implementation on her site we have been getting great product direction from her. So I wanted to share what a perfect customer behaves like! The kind of customer a start-up piloting its technology in the marketplace loves! We started our conversation when she was playing around with the widget. She had her own clear idea of how her user's are likely to react to the sign up and use model.
In the following section I am posting an edited transcript of our communication. Note how credible her commentary is because she has moved well beyond the "getting what PhlooQ" does stage. She is deep into how the value of PhlooQ needs to be pulled into alignment with how her audience will feel when they use it. She is making detailed refinements for her user base that will ultimately translate into a far superior experience for all PhlooQ users.
I publish the following with the permission of Janice Solimeno and Greenmoms.com in case you were wondering.
Begin edited transcript between PhlooQ and Greenmoms.com:
______________________
DAVID:
Okay so in the widget you don't like that we ask you for your cell number (and we don't indicate that its is optional -- though you feel we should). I get that. You also don't like the way the Add Facebook button looks because it doesn't say what you are adding Facebiook to. That makes sense to me.
You mentioned you had to "re-enter" the widget. This wll happen on occasion. The reason you have to re-enter could be one of many reasons: change of computer, change of browser, no use of a PhlooQ widget in a day or so between expressing interest, a cleared cache, etc...
While we are talking, how would you change the interface? How would you indicate the phone # is optional without making it too easy for people to skip? How would you implement the Add Facebook button so that it was clear you were Adding Facebook contacts to PhlooQ?
JANICE:
You got the main points just fine. As for what I'd address in the interface...
a. Easiest thing to do about the phone number (these are all and/or - do some or all):
1. just write "optional" in teeny letters to the right of the box or just under it, or "optional - may enter any 10 digit unique numerical ID"
2. add a "why my phone number" clickable text - open another small info window explaining all about how the ph # is used)
3. add in teeny letters near the box "to be used as your unique ID, not to share" or some such thing
b. For the Adding Facebook Button:
1. add a "what's this" clickable text - open another small info window explaining all about what's going to happen). In general I think you guys would benefit from having something on this popup screen where you could click and get more info about "What's "Q" or "What's PhlooQ" or "What's This?". The first exposure anyone might have to the service/function is a big Q near an event. That's it. The curious will click it. Then the reaction will likely be, "Huh? What is this and why are they asking for my phone number and getting me on Facebook"?
2. Change button label from ADD FACEBOOK - to something like CONNECT TO FACEBOOK or LINK FACEBOOK FRIENDS or (if you're eventually going to hook up to other piles of friends per your product roadmap) LINK TO YOUR FRIENDS or MEET UP WITH FRIENDS or HOOKUP WITH FRIENDS ... some kind of indication that this Q is going to associate events you're interested in with talking to your "friends" to see if they want to hookup at the place (I realize there is limited space for text...you could change the grammar: FRIENDS MEETUP, FRIENDS CONNECTION, FRIENDS HOOKUP...you get the idea).
DAVID:
Thanks so much for this. We will shuttle this over to Product and start looking at synthesizing these suggestions with the changes we already had in the pipe.
JANICE:
You are welcome. One last thought...
reading again about how the "Q" might be the only indicator of "do something with this event", you might want to consider naming the service and have that be identifiable under/near the Q - the Q itself may not be enough to get someone to click it. Like with "Share this", they have a visual identifier (the tinkertoy like icon or graph theory icon, depending upon your level of nerdiness) as well as text SHARE THIS. I got it immediately. I have no idea what the Q is for except once I know what your company's name is. But if you want to keep the Q maybe....
Q Q Q
Event Hookup Event Meetup Event Connection
Or some such...
DAVID:
Wow thanks again! Got it. Likely to just put rollover text on the Q but will see what the guys think about adding text beneath the Q. Recognition is a short term problem but until it is no longer a problem the text may very well be the right formula!
______________________
GREENMOMS.COM will be going live later this fall. We love the social responsibility, green, and community space. This sector of the Web publishing space is DYNAMIC. The publishers are going wild getting up sites and organizing events and announcing get togethers. For this reason we love that Janice Solimeno & Melinda MacNaughton the co-founders of GREENMOMS will be going live with PhlooQ's widget on their events page!
As she has worked toward implementation on her site we have been getting great product direction from her. So I wanted to share what a perfect customer behaves like! The kind of customer a start-up piloting its technology in the marketplace loves! We started our conversation when she was playing around with the widget. She had her own clear idea of how her user's are likely to react to the sign up and use model.
In the following section I am posting an edited transcript of our communication. Note how credible her commentary is because she has moved well beyond the "getting what PhlooQ" does stage. She is deep into how the value of PhlooQ needs to be pulled into alignment with how her audience will feel when they use it. She is making detailed refinements for her user base that will ultimately translate into a far superior experience for all PhlooQ users.
I publish the following with the permission of Janice Solimeno and Greenmoms.com in case you were wondering.
Begin edited transcript between PhlooQ and Greenmoms.com:
______________________
DAVID:
Okay so in the widget you don't like that we ask you for your cell number (and we don't indicate that its is optional -- though you feel we should). I get that. You also don't like the way the Add Facebook button looks because it doesn't say what you are adding Facebiook to. That makes sense to me.
You mentioned you had to "re-enter" the widget. This wll happen on occasion. The reason you have to re-enter could be one of many reasons: change of computer, change of browser, no use of a PhlooQ widget in a day or so between expressing interest, a cleared cache, etc...
While we are talking, how would you change the interface? How would you indicate the phone # is optional without making it too easy for people to skip? How would you implement the Add Facebook button so that it was clear you were Adding Facebook contacts to PhlooQ?
JANICE:
You got the main points just fine. As for what I'd address in the interface...
a. Easiest thing to do about the phone number (these are all and/or - do some or all):
1. just write "optional" in teeny letters to the right of the box or just under it, or "optional - may enter any 10 digit unique numerical ID"
2. add a "why my phone number" clickable text - open another small info window explaining all about how the ph # is used)
3. add in teeny letters near the box "to be used as your unique ID, not to share" or some such thing
b. For the Adding Facebook Button:
1. add a "what's this" clickable text - open another small info window explaining all about what's going to happen). In general I think you guys would benefit from having something on this popup screen where you could click and get more info about "What's "Q" or "What's PhlooQ" or "What's This?". The first exposure anyone might have to the service/function is a big Q near an event. That's it. The curious will click it. Then the reaction will likely be, "Huh? What is this and why are they asking for my phone number and getting me on Facebook"?
2. Change button label from ADD FACEBOOK - to something like CONNECT TO FACEBOOK or LINK FACEBOOK FRIENDS or (if you're eventually going to hook up to other piles of friends per your product roadmap) LINK TO YOUR FRIENDS or MEET UP WITH FRIENDS or HOOKUP WITH FRIENDS ... some kind of indication that this Q is going to associate events you're interested in with talking to your "friends" to see if they want to hookup at the place (I realize there is limited space for text...you could change the grammar: FRIENDS MEETUP, FRIENDS CONNECTION, FRIENDS HOOKUP...you get the idea).
DAVID:
Thanks so much for this. We will shuttle this over to Product and start looking at synthesizing these suggestions with the changes we already had in the pipe.
JANICE:
You are welcome. One last thought...
reading again about how the "Q" might be the only indicator of "do something with this event", you might want to consider naming the service and have that be identifiable under/near the Q - the Q itself may not be enough to get someone to click it. Like with "Share this", they have a visual identifier (the tinkertoy like icon or graph theory icon, depending upon your level of nerdiness) as well as text SHARE THIS. I got it immediately. I have no idea what the Q is for except once I know what your company's name is. But if you want to keep the Q maybe....
Q Q Q
Event Hookup Event Meetup Event Connection
Or some such...
DAVID:
Wow thanks again! Got it. Likely to just put rollover text on the Q but will see what the guys think about adding text beneath the Q. Recognition is a short term problem but until it is no longer a problem the text may very well be the right formula!
______________________
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
PHLOOQ CHOOSES LIFT AGENCY: LIFT BLOG
After much deliberation (and drawing out my decision to wait for late-coming proposals): we have chosen Michael Baumert's Lift Agency as our Web design firm.
Lift will be blogging about their process as they engage with us in the transformation of our skeleton site into a Web site that fits the needs of Publishers who come to our page looking for a social engagement widget to massively increase the connection between their visitors and the site.
I'll be keeping an eye on: http://www.liftagency.com/lifthome/ and be cross-linking when it makes sense.
Also, we'll be looking for votes and commentary on what you like and don't like as we forge ahead.
Rock-and-Roll!
Lift will be blogging about their process as they engage with us in the transformation of our skeleton site into a Web site that fits the needs of Publishers who come to our page looking for a social engagement widget to massively increase the connection between their visitors and the site.
I'll be keeping an eye on: http://www.liftagency.com/lifthome/ and be cross-linking when it makes sense.
Also, we'll be looking for votes and commentary on what you like and don't like as we forge ahead.
Rock-and-Roll!
Monday, September 22, 2008
PHLOOQ :: EVALUATING DESIGN FIRMS :: THE FINAL 3
I have spent the last week interviewing and soliciting proposals from design firms to design a Web site for PhlooQ (see http://phlooq.com).
The last few posts included some of the dimensions of what I am looking for in a design team for PhlooQ's web site. (A team that will ultimately drive the interfaces of the widgets, the ads we develop, and the brand identity in general.)
I may choose a firm and then decide to change creative direction but I'd prefer to find a design team that PhlooQ can grow with and keep as a partner over the long haul.
The dimensions that I talked about were:
1. Flexibility of mind
2. Ability to understand what we do, where we are, and where we are going
3. Demonstrated design capability
4. Affection for the team
5. Cost
6. Responsiveness
&
7. Risk taking
I called out #7 in my last post about "chickenshit." Everyone is a critic and these types will tell you what they don't like but they can't tell you what they would do instead. They won't risk putting their own ideas out there. My last post was focused on those folks who will tell you what they don't like but can't or won't tell you what they want to see.
These contributors fall into the people you hire to complain to you...they will tell you all that is wrong and wait around for you to give them another idea to complain about. They revel in the self-satisfaction of telling you that yet again another idea is bad or wrong. These folks wait around until you give them the safest, least common denominator idea: an idea so basic that they can't find a complaint about it. And then they encourage you to execute on that!
I want a design firm (and friends, and partners, and colleagues, and even customers) who will upgrade the quality of their complaints to constructive suggestions for improvement. I am interested in people who take the time to walk through the thought exercise of asking themselves, "I don't like this for this reason, okay so why is that? And now that I know why I don't like it, I can actually explain how this might be done better!"
I am looking for a design firm that is an endless fountain of ideas for improvement--I mean, I know when the UI sucks. I want you to create a solution that I didn't think of--I don't want to sit around and tell you all the ways it can be better and then watch you copy down my thinking and spit it back to me.
I've spent the last few days uncovering my own thinking about hiring a design firm. I have made transparent my flaws and my predispositions...I have narrowed the field down to three firms:
Skona
Kasman/Squillante
Lift
Skona: http://www.skona-advertising.com
Skona had the team I really felt akin to. There was something about their vibe that I bought into. Plus I love the demonstrated design skill from their Meyer Sound ad campaign. The "real" quality that is part of their Voice won me over. I was not so impressed with the Web sites they did. I felt like they had a decent idea of what we did though they did not request to connect with me on Facebook. That said the vibe was good and the way they talk about committing to an effort until a client is satisfied was great.
Kasman/Squllante: http://www.ksgraphic.com/
This pair probably had the highest pure design skill of any firm I looked at. Their minimalist approach was almost showy in how it made apparent their design skill. The way they think through the design problems they have solved is worth highlighting. I like these two very much! ...but felt like I would have to work on "connecting" with them. I also felt they were very deliberate and the kind of time pressure I might put on them could really squirrel the relationship.
Lift: http://liftagency.com
This group demonstrated the greatest flexibility of mind. The dynamic mind of the lead designer, Baumert, was impressive...as he seemed to think fast and react quickly. Every idea I tossed out he responded to and built on in a way I was hoping one might--with a twist or two I had not thought of! He is on Facebook and RSVP'd to the PhlooQ meetup event in Foster City (see http://phlooq.com). Also his demonstrated design skill is top notch. I liked the Dislocated Clothing part of his portfolio. Also, his proposal had cool surprises in it-- a risk taker!
Tomorrow? The winner!
The last few posts included some of the dimensions of what I am looking for in a design team for PhlooQ's web site. (A team that will ultimately drive the interfaces of the widgets, the ads we develop, and the brand identity in general.)
I may choose a firm and then decide to change creative direction but I'd prefer to find a design team that PhlooQ can grow with and keep as a partner over the long haul.
The dimensions that I talked about were:
1. Flexibility of mind
2. Ability to understand what we do, where we are, and where we are going
3. Demonstrated design capability
4. Affection for the team
5. Cost
6. Responsiveness
&
7. Risk taking
I called out #7 in my last post about "chickenshit." Everyone is a critic and these types will tell you what they don't like but they can't tell you what they would do instead. They won't risk putting their own ideas out there. My last post was focused on those folks who will tell you what they don't like but can't or won't tell you what they want to see.
These contributors fall into the people you hire to complain to you...they will tell you all that is wrong and wait around for you to give them another idea to complain about. They revel in the self-satisfaction of telling you that yet again another idea is bad or wrong. These folks wait around until you give them the safest, least common denominator idea: an idea so basic that they can't find a complaint about it. And then they encourage you to execute on that!
I want a design firm (and friends, and partners, and colleagues, and even customers) who will upgrade the quality of their complaints to constructive suggestions for improvement. I am interested in people who take the time to walk through the thought exercise of asking themselves, "I don't like this for this reason, okay so why is that? And now that I know why I don't like it, I can actually explain how this might be done better!"
I am looking for a design firm that is an endless fountain of ideas for improvement--I mean, I know when the UI sucks. I want you to create a solution that I didn't think of--I don't want to sit around and tell you all the ways it can be better and then watch you copy down my thinking and spit it back to me.
I've spent the last few days uncovering my own thinking about hiring a design firm. I have made transparent my flaws and my predispositions...I have narrowed the field down to three firms:
Skona
Kasman/Squillante
Lift
Skona: http://www.skona-advertising.com
Skona had the team I really felt akin to. There was something about their vibe that I bought into. Plus I love the demonstrated design skill from their Meyer Sound ad campaign. The "real" quality that is part of their Voice won me over. I was not so impressed with the Web sites they did. I felt like they had a decent idea of what we did though they did not request to connect with me on Facebook. That said the vibe was good and the way they talk about committing to an effort until a client is satisfied was great.
Kasman/Squllante: http://www.ksgraphic.com/
This pair probably had the highest pure design skill of any firm I looked at. Their minimalist approach was almost showy in how it made apparent their design skill. The way they think through the design problems they have solved is worth highlighting. I like these two very much! ...but felt like I would have to work on "connecting" with them. I also felt they were very deliberate and the kind of time pressure I might put on them could really squirrel the relationship.
Lift: http://liftagency.com
This group demonstrated the greatest flexibility of mind. The dynamic mind of the lead designer, Baumert, was impressive...as he seemed to think fast and react quickly. Every idea I tossed out he responded to and built on in a way I was hoping one might--with a twist or two I had not thought of! He is on Facebook and RSVP'd to the PhlooQ meetup event in Foster City (see http://phlooq.com). Also his demonstrated design skill is top notch. I liked the Dislocated Clothing part of his portfolio. Also, his proposal had cool surprises in it-- a risk taker!
Tomorrow? The winner!
Saturday, September 20, 2008
CHICKENSHITS: MORE ABOUT MY THINKING WHEN IT COMES TO CHOOSING A DESIGN FIRM
Generally speaking Silicon Valley has the rap of being a place where experimentation and innovation have deep roots. A place where we will try anything and have fun doing it.
Unfortunately in my experience over the last decade that is more of pleasant self-delusion than the real character of the place. Our true nature is that we behave according to smalltown backwater politics. We operate with cronyism and fear as our primary driver of our decisions.
Don't get me wrong, we love our own ideas (but hate everyone else's). We are great critics! But we are actually horrible early adopters. But this is what gives SV start-ups a Darwinian edge. If you can succeed in place where most people make themselves feel good by dissing other people's ideas (before they try and steal them for themselves) your edge is pretty sharp.
Consider that most start-ups face an environment where most of the investors, businesses, and pundits are so incredibly chickenshit that unless they are paid 10k and see their 5 closest friends doing it they are not going to touch a new idea with a ten foot pole.
The pleasant part of this is that great ideas and products will succeed in broader markets if they can succeed in our myopic subculture. And here I am, a deep part of our little backwater where we pretend to take risks. But most of us, really, are all huddled around the card table of our little ideas ever afraid the big bad wolf is going to come and blow our house down.
I have met dozens of entrepreneurs who have crushed their own ideas by locking them in a box under their beds, ever afraid this guy or that guy or this business or that investor is going to steal their oh so brilliant idea. They are chickenshit. Chickenshit of failure.
Chickenshit their idea wasn't really that good in the first place. Those other businesses the entrepreneur was afraid of? They are chickenshit too...and if they do steal your idea that behavior will come around and crush them in the end anyways. Those investors you are so afraid of that are going to take a struggling portfolio business and make them execute on your idea--they are chickenshit too.
So for better or worse as I push PhlooQ's engagement widget into the marketplace I have decided I will not act like a chickenshit nor will I do business with people who are chickenshit. This means that I am interested in people from the design firm I am choosing, to the investors we connect with, to the publishers we engage with, I will not operate as if the sky is falling.
I have gotten more email in the past few days from tire kickers than I care to deal with. If you really want to implement PhlooQ's widget I can turn a widget over to you in a few minutes but if all you want to do is talk, and talk, and talk some more--please move on.
At PhlooQ we are moving toward a self service model. In the next iteration, publishers will just login, push a few buttons and have customized PhlooQ code and widget for their site. In this way those who really want to implement PhlooQ's social engagement widget can do so quickly and on demand. Then chickenshits will have no reason to call me at all! Wahoo!
This does not mean PhlooQ does not want to provide every possible piece of information you need in order to implement. On the contrary, we want to be completely transparent in our process. So not only will we answer all the questions you need to feel comfortable with an implementation, but we will even implement for you on your behalf for free!
The implementation of a widget involves 2 steps. One placing a script source tag in the header of your pages and then dropping 75 characters or so of HTML into the place where you want the widget and you are done. Want a second widget for your site? Change one value of one parameter (and you can automate this) and you have a second widget...and so forth.
I have a self-image that I carry around that I fit this Serial Entrepreneur mold. Perhaps I am delusional but I am, for better or worse, typical ( if one can use that word ). I am a geek who graduated from one of the geekiest of schools: Carnegie Mellon. I watch Project Runway. I dive with great white sharks, love skiing and snowboarding and art. I buy in when the market is down. I watch the UFC. And I am constantly generating new ideas for products and helping other entrepreneurs execute on such ideas. I have spent alot of time around alot of people who take risk and make it work. And I have spent too much time around people who claim to be entrepreneurs and risk takers but have never actually taken any risks.
So how does this apply to choosing a design firm? I did not explicitly include "willingness to take risks" in the dimensions of my decision making in my last post. But I should have. I don't believe the willingness to take risk means be "flamboyant." Sometimes, the riskiest thing to do is be reserved and minimalist. That said if I perceive people I work with as assurance seekers, as people disinterested in really taking risk in a project,that will count against them.
I am not a one issue voter--so if I sense a design firm is risk averse this will not eliminate them from contention. But it won't help.
A little self-examination: do you "think" you are a risk taker or are you really a risk taker?
Unfortunately in my experience over the last decade that is more of pleasant self-delusion than the real character of the place. Our true nature is that we behave according to smalltown backwater politics. We operate with cronyism and fear as our primary driver of our decisions.
Don't get me wrong, we love our own ideas (but hate everyone else's). We are great critics! But we are actually horrible early adopters. But this is what gives SV start-ups a Darwinian edge. If you can succeed in place where most people make themselves feel good by dissing other people's ideas (before they try and steal them for themselves) your edge is pretty sharp.
Consider that most start-ups face an environment where most of the investors, businesses, and pundits are so incredibly chickenshit that unless they are paid 10k and see their 5 closest friends doing it they are not going to touch a new idea with a ten foot pole.
The pleasant part of this is that great ideas and products will succeed in broader markets if they can succeed in our myopic subculture. And here I am, a deep part of our little backwater where we pretend to take risks. But most of us, really, are all huddled around the card table of our little ideas ever afraid the big bad wolf is going to come and blow our house down.
I have met dozens of entrepreneurs who have crushed their own ideas by locking them in a box under their beds, ever afraid this guy or that guy or this business or that investor is going to steal their oh so brilliant idea. They are chickenshit. Chickenshit of failure.
Chickenshit their idea wasn't really that good in the first place. Those other businesses the entrepreneur was afraid of? They are chickenshit too...and if they do steal your idea that behavior will come around and crush them in the end anyways. Those investors you are so afraid of that are going to take a struggling portfolio business and make them execute on your idea--they are chickenshit too.
So for better or worse as I push PhlooQ's engagement widget into the marketplace I have decided I will not act like a chickenshit nor will I do business with people who are chickenshit. This means that I am interested in people from the design firm I am choosing, to the investors we connect with, to the publishers we engage with, I will not operate as if the sky is falling.
I have gotten more email in the past few days from tire kickers than I care to deal with. If you really want to implement PhlooQ's widget I can turn a widget over to you in a few minutes but if all you want to do is talk, and talk, and talk some more--please move on.
At PhlooQ we are moving toward a self service model. In the next iteration, publishers will just login, push a few buttons and have customized PhlooQ code and widget for their site. In this way those who really want to implement PhlooQ's social engagement widget can do so quickly and on demand. Then chickenshits will have no reason to call me at all! Wahoo!
This does not mean PhlooQ does not want to provide every possible piece of information you need in order to implement. On the contrary, we want to be completely transparent in our process. So not only will we answer all the questions you need to feel comfortable with an implementation, but we will even implement for you on your behalf for free!
The implementation of a widget involves 2 steps. One placing a script source tag in the header of your pages and then dropping 75 characters or so of HTML into the place where you want the widget and you are done. Want a second widget for your site? Change one value of one parameter (and you can automate this) and you have a second widget...and so forth.
I have a self-image that I carry around that I fit this Serial Entrepreneur mold. Perhaps I am delusional but I am, for better or worse, typical ( if one can use that word ). I am a geek who graduated from one of the geekiest of schools: Carnegie Mellon. I watch Project Runway. I dive with great white sharks, love skiing and snowboarding and art. I buy in when the market is down. I watch the UFC. And I am constantly generating new ideas for products and helping other entrepreneurs execute on such ideas. I have spent alot of time around alot of people who take risk and make it work. And I have spent too much time around people who claim to be entrepreneurs and risk takers but have never actually taken any risks.
So how does this apply to choosing a design firm? I did not explicitly include "willingness to take risks" in the dimensions of my decision making in my last post. But I should have. I don't believe the willingness to take risk means be "flamboyant." Sometimes, the riskiest thing to do is be reserved and minimalist. That said if I perceive people I work with as assurance seekers, as people disinterested in really taking risk in a project,that will count against them.
I am not a one issue voter--so if I sense a design firm is risk averse this will not eliminate them from contention. But it won't help.
A little self-examination: do you "think" you are a risk taker or are you really a risk taker?
Friday, September 19, 2008
PHLOOQ AND THE LATE ENTRANTS INTO THE DESIGN FRAY
My intention for today's post was to layout the dimensions of my decision-making criteria for choosing a design firm for PhlooQ's Web site and to then announce my decision.
PhlooQ will be taking its social engagement widget (see phlooq.com for an example) out to market with a group of publishers over the next 30-60 days. Before we do this we need to create a Web site that represents to publishers the value of what we do, how we do it, and even issue them a dare to see how far they can take PhlooQ's widget.
The widget and the basic metrics service behind the widget are free...so publishers are welcome to make a request for a widget for as wide ranging of a purpose as they can imagine. Quite frankly, the crazier the implementation the better!
Anyways, as I was laying out the dimensions for evaluating Skona, BayCreative, and Kasman/Squillante I received three additional requests to submit a proposal from firms that want to take a crack at the site. Lift Agency and Square2 have now entered the fray. And there is one more firm that looks like they may submit a proposal as well.
I've given all of these design firms our value proposition, one page summary, and backgrounder material. I've also run them through the Widget experience and other demos. So they all know what we are up to...
But no decision will get made today...
That does not stop me from laying out my thinking. In my decision making process I will be looking at in order the following dimensions:
1. My belief in the flexibility and dexterity of the mind's sitting across the table from me. Essentially I have to believe the group I am working with is smarter than me in as many ways as possible when it comes to developing our Web site.
2. My belief the people doing the work are capable of the creative thinking required to wrap a unique offering like PhlooQ into a design/offering that is both organic to PhlooQ and yet brings real eye-opening value to its brand, product, and experience.
3. My estimation of the record of demonstrated design skill and my affection for the design work of the group. If you rock, you rock! If I have to guess at what I might get or if I feel their is risk that what I might get will not sync with team, product, market, publishers and users then my estimation of capability in this dimension will be reduced. Think of this as the design team having a Voice I trust.
4. How I feel about the people...the vibe. This is #4 on my list...not a top priority because I can tell you that just because I like some one there is no guarantee they will perform. In fact often affinity with a contractor has led me astray. I cut people I "like" more slack and do not hold them to my typically high standards. Hiring a contract team is not the same as building an internal team. Building an internal team requires the highest of capability but also requires some dimension of camaraderie. Even then capability has to be there. Wow...what I mean is that I can't discount that I like some people more than others when I meet them. This will come into play when making a decision. Especially if this effort works out and I want t do more work with the firm.
5. What the cost of the project will be will come into play. While a difference on a proposal of a few grand here or there in most companies won't make difference, in the world of the start-up it always does. All things being equal or near equal...budget then becomes the driver. That said, no one wants to pay for an effort they don't believe in. So I will initially eliminate proposals based on higher priority criteria and then, of course, it comes down to price.
6. Speed...baby...baby speed. How fast, without compromising quality do I believe this firm will figure out what we do and get us moving towards a completed site? If I sense a firm thinks of a 60 day window as "too short" then I get the heeby jeebies. I need high intensity responsiveness without compromising any of the dimensions I established in 1-5. Think of this as having the requisite fidelity for my needs at all the right times.
Okay so there you go...the 6 dimensions of decison making criteria I will use for engaging with a designer on the PhlooQ.com Web site.
A couple of questions:
What dimensions/criteria did miss?
What did I miss that are a part of these dimensions?
PhlooQ will be taking its social engagement widget (see phlooq.com for an example) out to market with a group of publishers over the next 30-60 days. Before we do this we need to create a Web site that represents to publishers the value of what we do, how we do it, and even issue them a dare to see how far they can take PhlooQ's widget.
The widget and the basic metrics service behind the widget are free...so publishers are welcome to make a request for a widget for as wide ranging of a purpose as they can imagine. Quite frankly, the crazier the implementation the better!
Anyways, as I was laying out the dimensions for evaluating Skona, BayCreative, and Kasman/Squillante I received three additional requests to submit a proposal from firms that want to take a crack at the site. Lift Agency and Square2 have now entered the fray. And there is one more firm that looks like they may submit a proposal as well.
I've given all of these design firms our value proposition, one page summary, and backgrounder material. I've also run them through the Widget experience and other demos. So they all know what we are up to...
But no decision will get made today...
That does not stop me from laying out my thinking. In my decision making process I will be looking at in order the following dimensions:
1. My belief in the flexibility and dexterity of the mind's sitting across the table from me. Essentially I have to believe the group I am working with is smarter than me in as many ways as possible when it comes to developing our Web site.
2. My belief the people doing the work are capable of the creative thinking required to wrap a unique offering like PhlooQ into a design/offering that is both organic to PhlooQ and yet brings real eye-opening value to its brand, product, and experience.
3. My estimation of the record of demonstrated design skill and my affection for the design work of the group. If you rock, you rock! If I have to guess at what I might get or if I feel their is risk that what I might get will not sync with team, product, market, publishers and users then my estimation of capability in this dimension will be reduced. Think of this as the design team having a Voice I trust.
4. How I feel about the people...the vibe. This is #4 on my list...not a top priority because I can tell you that just because I like some one there is no guarantee they will perform. In fact often affinity with a contractor has led me astray. I cut people I "like" more slack and do not hold them to my typically high standards. Hiring a contract team is not the same as building an internal team. Building an internal team requires the highest of capability but also requires some dimension of camaraderie. Even then capability has to be there. Wow...what I mean is that I can't discount that I like some people more than others when I meet them. This will come into play when making a decision. Especially if this effort works out and I want t do more work with the firm.
5. What the cost of the project will be will come into play. While a difference on a proposal of a few grand here or there in most companies won't make difference, in the world of the start-up it always does. All things being equal or near equal...budget then becomes the driver. That said, no one wants to pay for an effort they don't believe in. So I will initially eliminate proposals based on higher priority criteria and then, of course, it comes down to price.
6. Speed...baby...baby speed. How fast, without compromising quality do I believe this firm will figure out what we do and get us moving towards a completed site? If I sense a firm thinks of a 60 day window as "too short" then I get the heeby jeebies. I need high intensity responsiveness without compromising any of the dimensions I established in 1-5. Think of this as having the requisite fidelity for my needs at all the right times.
Okay so there you go...the 6 dimensions of decison making criteria I will use for engaging with a designer on the PhlooQ.com Web site.
A couple of questions:
What dimensions/criteria did miss?
What did I miss that are a part of these dimensions?
Thursday, September 18, 2008
PHLOOQ IS VETTING DESIGN FIRMS (http://phlooq.com)
As a start-up there is always a trade off between how much time and money you invest in your look and feel versus what you invest in honing your product, technology and the value of that technology to your market. At PhlooQ we invested all of our efforts into product and made no effort to hone the site or brand of the company.
So here we are signing up partners, rolling the product into the marketplace...and we have no Web presence.
As a backgrounder, PhlooQ offers online publishers a free service to massively increase the engagement between their Web site and their visitors through social engagement ads and social engagement widgets. (if you want to see it in action go to http://phlooq.com and click on the Q).
In short the PhlooQ service can draw a visitor's entire social graph to a web site. For a single visitor with a social graph of 100 people publishers should expect to have their site marketed to 1,000 new potential visitors.
Here is how it works, the publishers places the free widget aside an event, a venue, or location and when the visiting user clicks on the widget the user can see who they know that might be going to the same event, venue or location.
The system then sends a message to the visitor's entire social graph letting their social graph know that they are interested in the venue, event, or location. If anyone in their social graph clicks on the link in the message the link will bring them to the publisher's site. And once they engage with the widget, the cycle repeats itself.
The system also sends the widget with the list of people at or nearby your place, event, or venue of interest to your cell phone. This way you can just look down at your cell phone to see who is at or near the event you're attending.
The system both on the Web and on your phone lets you click to call people in your social graph, text them if they are fellow widget users, and send them a notification to their social network if they are not users of the PhlooQ widget.
Also of use to the user is the Widget's built in mechanism for broadening your view of your social graph. Sometimes no one you know will be going to the same exact event as you -- so the Widget lets you look for fellowship in the local neighborhood, community, zip code, city area, or region. This means you can send a quick note or even call someone to go with you to somewhere you want to go.
For the publisher PhlooQ provides engagement reports and analytics and also provides ways for them to reach out to Widget users to make them offers of goods and services that are hypertargeted to their specific venue or neighborhood.
The publisher's job used to be--"get the eyeballs to my site." Now with PhlooQ the game changes--as we enable publishers to bring a visitor's entire social graph to their sites, without being intrusive. In fact, this mechanism for being the semantic expression of the user's interests creates a natural flow of the user's social graph that makes the users thankful for the link back to the publisher.
In some ways this is the holy grail of advertisement: for a fan of the publisher to automatically recommend their interests from whatever they do across the Web and across the "real" world to their friends--and have their friends thankful for the recommendation!
Here is a quick narrative that might help:
The event promoter for the Rock-n-Roll Cafe adds the PhlooQ widget to his Web site where he lists his schedule of events. As people visit his site they click on the widget titled “See who's going?” Each individual as they add the widget in a one-click sign-up now messages all of their friends. For example if a user named Brian signs up, PhlooQ sends a feed to all 237 of Brian's friends that “Brian is going to the Rock-n-Roll Cafe.”
For Brian, as he signs into the Rock-n-Roll Cafe widget he sees a list of people from his social network who are going to the Cafe. From within the widget he can call them or text them. If he sees friends nearby he can invite those friends to the Rock-n-Roll Cafe as well.
Additionally PhlooQ aggregates all of his affinities in a widget in his social network's interface--the Rock-N-Roll Cafe gets listed with his other affinities. In this way he can have his interests aligned with people he is connected to so he can easily connect with them. Lastly right on time, every time, PhlooQ sends a link to his mobile phone or iPhone so he can see a list of people associated with the experience right there in place, in the moment.
Okay so I am currently talking with several design groups that have made the first cut. I interviewed a dozen or so folks I was interested in having build our Web presence and then solicited proposal from the following groups: Kasman/Squillante, Bay Creative, and Skona. There may be one or two more groups that end up getting a chance to submit a proposal, as I'm still vetting a few others.
What I can say is that I have a good feeling about the three design firms I am currently vetting. They are all so different in their personality but in different ways I am enamored with each of their approaches. In my next post I'll chat a bit about my experience vetting the proposals. The budget is tight, the need for quality is high and time is running out! We are going live with a dozen or so publishers in the next 30-60 days so the work has to be done one way or the other!
So here we are signing up partners, rolling the product into the marketplace...and we have no Web presence.
As a backgrounder, PhlooQ offers online publishers a free service to massively increase the engagement between their Web site and their visitors through social engagement ads and social engagement widgets. (if you want to see it in action go to http://phlooq.com and click on the Q).
In short the PhlooQ service can draw a visitor's entire social graph to a web site. For a single visitor with a social graph of 100 people publishers should expect to have their site marketed to 1,000 new potential visitors.
Here is how it works, the publishers places the free widget aside an event, a venue, or location and when the visiting user clicks on the widget the user can see who they know that might be going to the same event, venue or location.
The system then sends a message to the visitor's entire social graph letting their social graph know that they are interested in the venue, event, or location. If anyone in their social graph clicks on the link in the message the link will bring them to the publisher's site. And once they engage with the widget, the cycle repeats itself.
The system also sends the widget with the list of people at or nearby your place, event, or venue of interest to your cell phone. This way you can just look down at your cell phone to see who is at or near the event you're attending.
The system both on the Web and on your phone lets you click to call people in your social graph, text them if they are fellow widget users, and send them a notification to their social network if they are not users of the PhlooQ widget.
Also of use to the user is the Widget's built in mechanism for broadening your view of your social graph. Sometimes no one you know will be going to the same exact event as you -- so the Widget lets you look for fellowship in the local neighborhood, community, zip code, city area, or region. This means you can send a quick note or even call someone to go with you to somewhere you want to go.
For the publisher PhlooQ provides engagement reports and analytics and also provides ways for them to reach out to Widget users to make them offers of goods and services that are hypertargeted to their specific venue or neighborhood.
The publisher's job used to be--"get the eyeballs to my site." Now with PhlooQ the game changes--as we enable publishers to bring a visitor's entire social graph to their sites, without being intrusive. In fact, this mechanism for being the semantic expression of the user's interests creates a natural flow of the user's social graph that makes the users thankful for the link back to the publisher.
In some ways this is the holy grail of advertisement: for a fan of the publisher to automatically recommend their interests from whatever they do across the Web and across the "real" world to their friends--and have their friends thankful for the recommendation!
Here is a quick narrative that might help:
The event promoter for the Rock-n-Roll Cafe adds the PhlooQ widget to his Web site where he lists his schedule of events. As people visit his site they click on the widget titled “See who's going?” Each individual as they add the widget in a one-click sign-up now messages all of their friends. For example if a user named Brian signs up, PhlooQ sends a feed to all 237 of Brian's friends that “Brian is going to the Rock-n-Roll Cafe.”
For Brian, as he signs into the Rock-n-Roll Cafe widget he sees a list of people from his social network who are going to the Cafe. From within the widget he can call them or text them. If he sees friends nearby he can invite those friends to the Rock-n-Roll Cafe as well.
Additionally PhlooQ aggregates all of his affinities in a widget in his social network's interface--the Rock-N-Roll Cafe gets listed with his other affinities. In this way he can have his interests aligned with people he is connected to so he can easily connect with them. Lastly right on time, every time, PhlooQ sends a link to his mobile phone or iPhone so he can see a list of people associated with the experience right there in place, in the moment.
Okay so I am currently talking with several design groups that have made the first cut. I interviewed a dozen or so folks I was interested in having build our Web presence and then solicited proposal from the following groups: Kasman/Squillante, Bay Creative, and Skona. There may be one or two more groups that end up getting a chance to submit a proposal, as I'm still vetting a few others.
What I can say is that I have a good feeling about the three design firms I am currently vetting. They are all so different in their personality but in different ways I am enamored with each of their approaches. In my next post I'll chat a bit about my experience vetting the proposals. The budget is tight, the need for quality is high and time is running out! We are going live with a dozen or so publishers in the next 30-60 days so the work has to be done one way or the other!
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Social Media and Social Engagement Top of Mind for CMOs
I recently attended the Aberdeen CMO conference to get a feel for where CMOs are at with regards social media at large and social engagement advertising in particular.
The event keynote was "Paul DePodesta, the former General Manager of the L.A. Dodgers and now Special Assistant for Baseball Operations for the San Diego Padres." He was profiled in the bestselling book "Moneyball" and celebrated as "a baseball operations wunderkind." My key takeaway from DePodesta was that bad process can get you good results -- and this is the worst case scenario because it misleads the future of the organization. Constant and never-ending evaluation improvement to process by asking the question "If we didn't have to do it the way we are doing it, if we could do it right, how would we be doing it?"
I was fortunate, the 600$ event came to me free compliments of Taproot (see: Taproot Foundation.org). Taproot is a volunteer-based organization many local techies like myself contribute time to in order to support local non-profits.
The speakers I listened to were:
* Cathy Halligan, CMO, Walmart.com
* Patrice Varni, VP of Marketing, Levi’s
* Sylvia Reynolds, CMO, Wells Fargo
* Scott Ballantyne, Vice President of Consumer Direct at Hewlett Packard
* Pablo Azar, VP Marketing Strategy and Consumer Insights ALLSTATE
* Stephan Chase, VP Customer Knowledge, Marriott
* Denise Shiffman, Marketing Strategist, Speaker and Author Engage Daily Blog
There were many memorable moments. There was Cathy Halligan's call out of The Share This with Friends button--she implied the smallest part of her site might be one of the most important. There was Patrice Varni's slide illustrating how the Project Runway integrated media marketing campaign in conjunction with Projekt 501 created a new marketplace for women and Levis--women went from buying 50$ jeans in low volume to buying stylized Levis jeans in high volume at 70$ a pair. This was an unanticipated result their Project 501--perhaps the most elaborate user generated content / social media play in all of the Fortune 5000.
There was Sylvia Reynold's assertion: "If you aren't in social media you are fooling yourself because your customers have already taken you there." The implication is that if you aren't interfacing your integrated marketing into the social marketing space your customers are already there talking about you, your products and your services--with you. So you might as well be part of the conversation.
There was Chase asserting that Aristotle not Web 2.0 invented CRM. Aristotle places the value of relationships in three strata. 1. I like you because I have use of you (lowest level) 2. I like you because it is a pleasure to be with you. 3. I like you because we have mutual regard for each other: I want what is best for you and you want what is best for me. An interesting frame within which to operate a customer experience management analytics group!
Then there was Azar who had boiled down the entire marketing department to a page actuarial function. Azar's modeling group had figured out how to frame every marketing effort into an actuarial summary that gave the Marketing Program's value to the organization in real dollars. In fact even non-metric and non-operationalized efforts such as social media can have their % budget allocation factored into the marketing mix.
Perhaps the highlight of the show was Ballantyne's Irish brogue rippling through the auditorium explaining how Buzz Works took the HP Dragon from a floundering flagship laptop to screaming success in the marketplace and in the CFO's office. Using a social media campaign focused on a series of conversation between bloggers in the PC blogging community Buzz Works helped Ballantyne double the sales of the flailing product line.
Denise Shiffman provide a ho hum but validating discussion of her book: "The Age of Engage." Her thesis is that the social marketing space is moving toward models of engagement. Every piece of the marketing mix has to engage with the customer in a conversation that feels like an authentic conversation about what the customer is interested in. The conversation needs to not be between you and your customer--the conversation needs to be between a customer and their friends or trusted advisors in the market place.
Surveys at the show and elsewhere have shown that we make our decisions: where to go, what to buy, who to connect with in well over 60% of the time based on what our friends, family, and social relationships say to us.
The highest level takeaway of social marketing from this CMO event is this:
If marketers want to be successful they have to find a way to remain authentic and become the topic of conversation in and amongst their customer's social graph without forcing their way in. Be trusted, be present but don't interrupt, be automatic but personal, be the topic of conversation but leave the conversation to others.
All of this adds up to opportunity for start-ups. Who can provide an organization a way to make use of their customers visits by accessing their social graph and then becoming a key conversation in and amongst that social graph. Who can then spiral from that one customer's social graph outward into the conversation of all the social graphs of all that customer's friends? Who can help marketers engage and re-engage with customers in an authentic way while at the same time exponentially expanding the marketplaces encounter with their customer's conversation? Who can convert word of mouth to word of net?
Start-ups are emerging in the engagement space--this space of engagement widgets, and engagement ads, semantic web and location sensitive conversations will bring the holy grail to the castle of the marketer. Start-ups will afford marketers to offer the right product, at the right time, to the right people, at the right place, in the right psychological, financial and behavioral context. This will be a space to watch this next year and half.
The event keynote was "Paul DePodesta, the former General Manager of the L.A. Dodgers and now Special Assistant for Baseball Operations for the San Diego Padres." He was profiled in the bestselling book "Moneyball" and celebrated as "a baseball operations wunderkind." My key takeaway from DePodesta was that bad process can get you good results -- and this is the worst case scenario because it misleads the future of the organization. Constant and never-ending evaluation improvement to process by asking the question "If we didn't have to do it the way we are doing it, if we could do it right, how would we be doing it?"
I was fortunate, the 600$ event came to me free compliments of Taproot (see: Taproot Foundation.org). Taproot is a volunteer-based organization many local techies like myself contribute time to in order to support local non-profits.
The speakers I listened to were:
* Cathy Halligan, CMO, Walmart.com
* Patrice Varni, VP of Marketing, Levi’s
* Sylvia Reynolds, CMO, Wells Fargo
* Scott Ballantyne, Vice President of Consumer Direct at Hewlett Packard
* Pablo Azar, VP Marketing Strategy and Consumer Insights ALLSTATE
* Stephan Chase, VP Customer Knowledge, Marriott
* Denise Shiffman, Marketing Strategist, Speaker and Author Engage Daily Blog
There were many memorable moments. There was Cathy Halligan's call out of The Share This with Friends button--she implied the smallest part of her site might be one of the most important. There was Patrice Varni's slide illustrating how the Project Runway integrated media marketing campaign in conjunction with Projekt 501 created a new marketplace for women and Levis--women went from buying 50$ jeans in low volume to buying stylized Levis jeans in high volume at 70$ a pair. This was an unanticipated result their Project 501--perhaps the most elaborate user generated content / social media play in all of the Fortune 5000.
There was Sylvia Reynold's assertion: "If you aren't in social media you are fooling yourself because your customers have already taken you there." The implication is that if you aren't interfacing your integrated marketing into the social marketing space your customers are already there talking about you, your products and your services--with you. So you might as well be part of the conversation.
There was Chase asserting that Aristotle not Web 2.0 invented CRM. Aristotle places the value of relationships in three strata. 1. I like you because I have use of you (lowest level) 2. I like you because it is a pleasure to be with you. 3. I like you because we have mutual regard for each other: I want what is best for you and you want what is best for me. An interesting frame within which to operate a customer experience management analytics group!
Then there was Azar who had boiled down the entire marketing department to a page actuarial function. Azar's modeling group had figured out how to frame every marketing effort into an actuarial summary that gave the Marketing Program's value to the organization in real dollars. In fact even non-metric and non-operationalized efforts such as social media can have their % budget allocation factored into the marketing mix.
Perhaps the highlight of the show was Ballantyne's Irish brogue rippling through the auditorium explaining how Buzz Works took the HP Dragon from a floundering flagship laptop to screaming success in the marketplace and in the CFO's office. Using a social media campaign focused on a series of conversation between bloggers in the PC blogging community Buzz Works helped Ballantyne double the sales of the flailing product line.
Denise Shiffman provide a ho hum but validating discussion of her book: "The Age of Engage." Her thesis is that the social marketing space is moving toward models of engagement. Every piece of the marketing mix has to engage with the customer in a conversation that feels like an authentic conversation about what the customer is interested in. The conversation needs to not be between you and your customer--the conversation needs to be between a customer and their friends or trusted advisors in the market place.
Surveys at the show and elsewhere have shown that we make our decisions: where to go, what to buy, who to connect with in well over 60% of the time based on what our friends, family, and social relationships say to us.
The highest level takeaway of social marketing from this CMO event is this:
If marketers want to be successful they have to find a way to remain authentic and become the topic of conversation in and amongst their customer's social graph without forcing their way in. Be trusted, be present but don't interrupt, be automatic but personal, be the topic of conversation but leave the conversation to others.
All of this adds up to opportunity for start-ups. Who can provide an organization a way to make use of their customers visits by accessing their social graph and then becoming a key conversation in and amongst that social graph. Who can then spiral from that one customer's social graph outward into the conversation of all the social graphs of all that customer's friends? Who can help marketers engage and re-engage with customers in an authentic way while at the same time exponentially expanding the marketplaces encounter with their customer's conversation? Who can convert word of mouth to word of net?
Start-ups are emerging in the engagement space--this space of engagement widgets, and engagement ads, semantic web and location sensitive conversations will bring the holy grail to the castle of the marketer. Start-ups will afford marketers to offer the right product, at the right time, to the right people, at the right place, in the right psychological, financial and behavioral context. This will be a space to watch this next year and half.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Taproot Launches Friends of the San Francisco Public Library Web Site...
Health, wealth, excellence, abundance, and joy are the 5 key precepts that I remind myself to focus on every day.
Service to the community has always been a significant dimension of my life. What I disliked about service was that many service opportunities asked me to volunteer time doing tasks I was not good at or tasks that any one could do. I always felt like I could give more to my causes if I could give my causes the full value of my skills.
For example instead of donating a book to the local library wouldn't they be better served by me if I could help them raise awareness of their services and their programs by building them a new Web site or new Brand campaign?
But I didn't think there was any mechanism for me to volunteer my marketing, business, and technology acumen to such places. That was until I found Taproot, where we "do it pro bono."
Today, we launched the second Web grant project I have volunteered to guide. I am an account director/grant manager for Taproot and I lead the development, design, build and launch of Advanced Website grants for Taproot.
The first Taproot project I was involved with was the Slide Ranch web site: http://slideranch.org/news where I acted as Grant Manager / Account Director. At Taproot I acted as the Grant Manager/Account Director for the Slide Ranch Advanced Website Grant. Slide Ranch, “Where the Bay Area Gets Down to Earth,” provides outdoor education programs focused on re-connecting students to where food and clothing come from. For the Slide Ranch Advanced Website Grant I built a 7 person team consisting of a Marketing Manager, Copy Writer, Web Designer, Web Programmer, Account Director, Slide Ranch Liaison, and the Executive Director of Slide Ranch.
This team based on the pro-bono model developed an advanced Web site executing on the Taproot process. The Taproot process includes steps such as a project plan, time line, requirements docs, design directions, wire frames, beta site, and go live.
Live today, the second Taproot project is the Friends of the San Francisco Public Library web site: http://www.friendssfpl.org/ or http://www.friendsandfoundation.org/. The Friends of the San Francisco Public Library is a legendary local non-profit serving the Bay area's entire chain of local libraries. I felt it was a great honor to be of service to this incredible organization. For this project our team ebbed and flowed. We lost members of the team to disease, car accidents, pregnancy, and job changes. During the development of the site I saw two companies fold, my mother died, and I divorced my wife. But some how the remaining team of myself, Civiane Chung, David Balmer, and Natalie Thompson stuck it out and finished the project.
Here are the credits: http://www.friendsandfoundation.net/?Credits listing the team.
My joy at completing this second Taproot project is quite deep. The investment by the volunteers, in sum, by both current team members and by ex-team members is well over 400 hours of work. Considering the size of the Friends site and considering the variability in the project, I couldn't be more proud of this team's accomplishment.
Interested in donating your technical, business, or marketing skills to local non-profits in need? Check out http://taprootfoundation.org.
Interested in your local library and the programs they run? Check out http://www.friendssfpl.org/
Service to the community has always been a significant dimension of my life. What I disliked about service was that many service opportunities asked me to volunteer time doing tasks I was not good at or tasks that any one could do. I always felt like I could give more to my causes if I could give my causes the full value of my skills.
For example instead of donating a book to the local library wouldn't they be better served by me if I could help them raise awareness of their services and their programs by building them a new Web site or new Brand campaign?
But I didn't think there was any mechanism for me to volunteer my marketing, business, and technology acumen to such places. That was until I found Taproot, where we "do it pro bono."
Today, we launched the second Web grant project I have volunteered to guide. I am an account director/grant manager for Taproot and I lead the development, design, build and launch of Advanced Website grants for Taproot.
The first Taproot project I was involved with was the Slide Ranch web site: http://slideranch.org/news where I acted as Grant Manager / Account Director. At Taproot I acted as the Grant Manager/Account Director for the Slide Ranch Advanced Website Grant. Slide Ranch, “Where the Bay Area Gets Down to Earth,” provides outdoor education programs focused on re-connecting students to where food and clothing come from. For the Slide Ranch Advanced Website Grant I built a 7 person team consisting of a Marketing Manager, Copy Writer, Web Designer, Web Programmer, Account Director, Slide Ranch Liaison, and the Executive Director of Slide Ranch.
This team based on the pro-bono model developed an advanced Web site executing on the Taproot process. The Taproot process includes steps such as a project plan, time line, requirements docs, design directions, wire frames, beta site, and go live.
Live today, the second Taproot project is the Friends of the San Francisco Public Library web site: http://www.friendssfpl.org/ or http://www.friendsandfoundation.org/. The Friends of the San Francisco Public Library is a legendary local non-profit serving the Bay area's entire chain of local libraries. I felt it was a great honor to be of service to this incredible organization. For this project our team ebbed and flowed. We lost members of the team to disease, car accidents, pregnancy, and job changes. During the development of the site I saw two companies fold, my mother died, and I divorced my wife. But some how the remaining team of myself, Civiane Chung, David Balmer, and Natalie Thompson stuck it out and finished the project.
Here are the credits: http://www.friendsandfoundation.net/?Credits listing the team.
My joy at completing this second Taproot project is quite deep. The investment by the volunteers, in sum, by both current team members and by ex-team members is well over 400 hours of work. Considering the size of the Friends site and considering the variability in the project, I couldn't be more proud of this team's accomplishment.
Interested in donating your technical, business, or marketing skills to local non-profits in need? Check out http://taprootfoundation.org.
Interested in your local library and the programs they run? Check out http://www.friendssfpl.org/
Monday, July 28, 2008
Fighting the good fight....
In a start-up we often get a diligent board and a passionate CEO. A less common situation is a passionate board and a diligent CEO. In both cases in start-ups the vision of the company is driven, necessarily, by people with blinders on. They essentially have tossed away any disbelief in their approach to their vision.
My question is in about how to amend such a vision when the team of a start-up realizes the board and CEO are barking up the wrong tree?
Whether you are the head of engineering or the head of sales or any other such team member -- if you begin to see that the direction of the start-up has not been set correctly how can you alert leadership and help them course correct without getting fired or being considered a drag on the business?
I've seen several attempts at this and the ability of the wheel house of the company to hear the sounds coming from the engine room is often lacking.
So how does a QA Director or a VP of Sales or such a team member open the ear of the board? In a team of ten or so people one would think this would never be an issue and yet I see time and time again the engine room conversation is never heard? Is this a structural defect in start-ups that can't afford to hear about their own potential flaws? Is it a necessary evil of the hard charging all steam ahead nature of a start-up? When is a course correction too late? Or is it never too late?
These are the kinds of questions I think teams in start-ups often face. Questions that usually don't or can't get answered.
My question is in about how to amend such a vision when the team of a start-up realizes the board and CEO are barking up the wrong tree?
Whether you are the head of engineering or the head of sales or any other such team member -- if you begin to see that the direction of the start-up has not been set correctly how can you alert leadership and help them course correct without getting fired or being considered a drag on the business?
I've seen several attempts at this and the ability of the wheel house of the company to hear the sounds coming from the engine room is often lacking.
So how does a QA Director or a VP of Sales or such a team member open the ear of the board? In a team of ten or so people one would think this would never be an issue and yet I see time and time again the engine room conversation is never heard? Is this a structural defect in start-ups that can't afford to hear about their own potential flaws? Is it a necessary evil of the hard charging all steam ahead nature of a start-up? When is a course correction too late? Or is it never too late?
These are the kinds of questions I think teams in start-ups often face. Questions that usually don't or can't get answered.
Monday, July 14, 2008
The odds...
Once upon a time when I was thinking about growing up to be a serial entrepreneur I heard the following:
"One in a 100 start-ups get to the seed funding stage. One in hundred of those get to a Series A. One in a hundred of those that get a Series A or a Seed round get a Series B or an exit..."
This was followed by "One in 10,000 start-ups get to a public offering..."
A sane person would say that these odds suck.
I, of course, said, I like those odds. I am not unlike many of the extreme skiing, surfing, shark-diving entrepreneurs who believe the long odds make ourselves the favorite. I am amongst a large crew of start-up guys who believe the world conspires in our favor when the odds are longest. I actually believe that the odds tilt in my favor because I am involved. If the typical odds for a "normal" entrepreneur are 1:100 then I believe the odds for ME are more like 1:5.
From my experience with others in the start-up arena this prospect of success despite the odds is a common thread. For some it is their belief in their intelligence, or their technical acumen...for others it is their belief in how they read the marketplace...for still others it is their belief that they can sell anything...and for still others they believe they can build great teams and great teams can do anything. Whatever it is that the serial entrepreneur brings to the table they think they bring it in spades.
"One in a 100 start-ups get to the seed funding stage. One in hundred of those get to a Series A. One in a hundred of those that get a Series A or a Seed round get a Series B or an exit..."
This was followed by "One in 10,000 start-ups get to a public offering..."
A sane person would say that these odds suck.
I, of course, said, I like those odds. I am not unlike many of the extreme skiing, surfing, shark-diving entrepreneurs who believe the long odds make ourselves the favorite. I am amongst a large crew of start-up guys who believe the world conspires in our favor when the odds are longest. I actually believe that the odds tilt in my favor because I am involved. If the typical odds for a "normal" entrepreneur are 1:100 then I believe the odds for ME are more like 1:5.
From my experience with others in the start-up arena this prospect of success despite the odds is a common thread. For some it is their belief in their intelligence, or their technical acumen...for others it is their belief in how they read the marketplace...for still others it is their belief that they can sell anything...and for still others they believe they can build great teams and great teams can do anything. Whatever it is that the serial entrepreneur brings to the table they think they bring it in spades.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Old Stuff that is cool that still hasn't been built...
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6877137.html
One of the patents I worked on at a doomed start-up called Aurigin is now out there in the free patent universe. I believe alot of the ideas once "pending patent" are worthy of review. If I was in a sector and starting a new technology business I would at least window shop the world of expired and untended IP.
For example this piece of IP: System, method and computer program product for mediating notes and note sub-notes linked or otherwise associated with stored or networked web pages
is still a very interesting consumer service.
At the time we called it codename WEBSTER because you could surf anywhere annotate anything, share the links and annotations with anyone. Very fun, social browsing stuff...but in 1998...in an enterprise start-up focused on Pharma and Chemical the idea of a consumer service as a marketing function for the business was considered beyond stupid.
Of course in hindsight, WEBSTER was the future and the core business a dead end.
One of the patents I worked on at a doomed start-up called Aurigin is now out there in the free patent universe. I believe alot of the ideas once "pending patent" are worthy of review. If I was in a sector and starting a new technology business I would at least window shop the world of expired and untended IP.
For example this piece of IP: System, method and computer program product for mediating notes and note sub-notes linked or otherwise associated with stored or networked web pages
is still a very interesting consumer service.
At the time we called it codename WEBSTER because you could surf anywhere annotate anything, share the links and annotations with anyone. Very fun, social browsing stuff...but in 1998...in an enterprise start-up focused on Pharma and Chemical the idea of a consumer service as a marketing function for the business was considered beyond stupid.
Of course in hindsight, WEBSTER was the future and the core business a dead end.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
6 Million Dollars Later...
When I was at AvantGo some 8 years ago I worked for a VP of Services that always thought big. His mantra was "go big or go home."
I was struck by the boldness of the approach and seduced by its grandiosity. What promises of success and wealth were contained in the claim! Typically, as with this VP, the claim is laced with additional baggage that results in an organization trying to do too much at once in too little time.
There at AvantGo I think the the "too much" was the attempt to build out an application suite AND create an enterprise platform AND create a profitable consumer service as disconnected businesses--each with their own P&L.
The key lesson I have learned from the series of 5 or so start-ups that I have been involved with is that you can "go big" (in fact it is a requirement of the vision of any investor backed effort) but you must focus on a core proposition. If you have more than one core proposition when you are a Seed or Series A stage start-up then you have too many propositions and you are unfocused. I have actually found that it is impossible for a start-up to be too focused. Often people see two risks--being unfocused or being too focused. Yet 95% of the time the problem is being not focused enough. So are there really two equal risks?
At TailWind, a small company I founded, my engineering group thought it was a joke to refine the thinking of the business down to one value proposition. They dismissed the idea of the business having a culture of accountability and aligning around a core principle.
This is not uncommon. Most engineering groups get through the day on a steady diet of sarcasm and irony. The nature of most software engineers is to be skeptical, uncommitted and critical because these are easy attitudes to stay safe behind. When engineers feel a greater need to stay safe and cynical behind their critical eye this is a sure sign they are reluctant to commit to success. This is a sure sign the start-up is getting off on the wrong foot.
This attitude is often the result of bad experiences. So its manifestation is often not the individual engineer's dysfunction as too many leaders have insisted to them the business must "go big or go home" resulting in thrash of engineers, their teams, and their efforts. This especially happens when go big translates into a lack of focus that seems more like a call to action to "boil the ocean."
When I have been successful with the start-ups I have been involved with is when we have aligned the culture of our start-up team around some basic ideas.
The first is that all involved, everyone, no one excepted has to buy in to the shared vision of the business and the product that will start the business toward that vision.
The second is that all involved, no one excepted, has to buy into a way of going about the business with explicitly agreed to principles of how we treat each other and how we keep communication flowing through and organization. Some simple examples of this are a) the one up one down method of sending email (there are no 1 to 1 communications in a business of three or more people) b) ask don't tell (inquire rather than dictate).
Thirdly, is that all involved have to desire to make meaningful commitments, on a daily basis, to the vision of the business. That is to say ambiguity, noncommittal attitudes, ambivalence are attitudes that hurt a business as much or even worse than attitudes of spite or disdain. At least with spite and disdain everyone is aware of the position of the person who holds the attitude. With ambiguity, ambivalence and non-committal attitudes they appear to not do any harm and they whitewash the energy of the business.
Theses gray attitudes substitute wishy-washiness in place of clarity, insouciance in place of progress, ignorance in place of accountability. I am surprised at how high a % of my experiences at both start-ups and established businesses are populated with people that prefer lack of clarity and unrequested commitment. From my observations this preference happens unwittingly. Leaders and teams alike seem to agree they won't uncover what they really need to do. I always look to create or be part of a group that can make a commitment to a vision then commit to what they will do that day, that week, that month, that quarter--and then they make every effort to to get it done.
I was struck by the boldness of the approach and seduced by its grandiosity. What promises of success and wealth were contained in the claim! Typically, as with this VP, the claim is laced with additional baggage that results in an organization trying to do too much at once in too little time.
There at AvantGo I think the the "too much" was the attempt to build out an application suite AND create an enterprise platform AND create a profitable consumer service as disconnected businesses--each with their own P&L.
The key lesson I have learned from the series of 5 or so start-ups that I have been involved with is that you can "go big" (in fact it is a requirement of the vision of any investor backed effort) but you must focus on a core proposition. If you have more than one core proposition when you are a Seed or Series A stage start-up then you have too many propositions and you are unfocused. I have actually found that it is impossible for a start-up to be too focused. Often people see two risks--being unfocused or being too focused. Yet 95% of the time the problem is being not focused enough. So are there really two equal risks?
At TailWind, a small company I founded, my engineering group thought it was a joke to refine the thinking of the business down to one value proposition. They dismissed the idea of the business having a culture of accountability and aligning around a core principle.
This is not uncommon. Most engineering groups get through the day on a steady diet of sarcasm and irony. The nature of most software engineers is to be skeptical, uncommitted and critical because these are easy attitudes to stay safe behind. When engineers feel a greater need to stay safe and cynical behind their critical eye this is a sure sign they are reluctant to commit to success. This is a sure sign the start-up is getting off on the wrong foot.
This attitude is often the result of bad experiences. So its manifestation is often not the individual engineer's dysfunction as too many leaders have insisted to them the business must "go big or go home" resulting in thrash of engineers, their teams, and their efforts. This especially happens when go big translates into a lack of focus that seems more like a call to action to "boil the ocean."
When I have been successful with the start-ups I have been involved with is when we have aligned the culture of our start-up team around some basic ideas.
The first is that all involved, everyone, no one excepted has to buy in to the shared vision of the business and the product that will start the business toward that vision.
The second is that all involved, no one excepted, has to buy into a way of going about the business with explicitly agreed to principles of how we treat each other and how we keep communication flowing through and organization. Some simple examples of this are a) the one up one down method of sending email (there are no 1 to 1 communications in a business of three or more people) b) ask don't tell (inquire rather than dictate).
Thirdly, is that all involved have to desire to make meaningful commitments, on a daily basis, to the vision of the business. That is to say ambiguity, noncommittal attitudes, ambivalence are attitudes that hurt a business as much or even worse than attitudes of spite or disdain. At least with spite and disdain everyone is aware of the position of the person who holds the attitude. With ambiguity, ambivalence and non-committal attitudes they appear to not do any harm and they whitewash the energy of the business.
Theses gray attitudes substitute wishy-washiness in place of clarity, insouciance in place of progress, ignorance in place of accountability. I am surprised at how high a % of my experiences at both start-ups and established businesses are populated with people that prefer lack of clarity and unrequested commitment. From my observations this preference happens unwittingly. Leaders and teams alike seem to agree they won't uncover what they really need to do. I always look to create or be part of a group that can make a commitment to a vision then commit to what they will do that day, that week, that month, that quarter--and then they make every effort to to get it done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)