Sorry for absence from these pages last week-leaves on the line and all that. Did you even notice that Cicero was not here?
This week, as trailled when we were last together, we are going to continue to discuss the role of social media in effective brand building. Now you will know from previous discussions that Cicero is not a big fan of sequels but in this case we are hoping to produce another Toy Story 2 and not a Jaws 2 or even 3.
You will recall that when we last came together on these pages we discussed whether or not your brand was suited to appearing on Facebook or Twitter and we argued that only those brands with characteristics that lent themselves to being talked about should seek to acquire Twitter followers and Facebook friends. And given the number of brands out there trying to use social media but who are there in name only and just about clinging on, it would seem that that there are many brands using social media only because it is the latest bandwagon rather than really truly understanding how to use these new platforms for real marketing benefit.
But even if you have agreed that your brand fits the criteria of a talked about brand, please ask yourself these questions before jumping on the bandwagon. You can be assured that failure to ask and answer these questions can have serious consequences for your brand-at best you will look like you have no friends, a real Billy No Mate of a brand, but at worse those who are following you will be stabbing you in the back. Do you really want that?
And so the first question to ask, are you willing to engage in a public dialogue with your friends and followers? Think about it-up to now your communications with customers and prospects has been monologue but these new channels are designed to allow dialogue. This can be troubling for some.
A while back reporters on the Washington Post, the journal that gave a new word to the English language, ‘Watergate’, were banned from using Twitter accounts (personal or Post branded) to speak on behalf of the company, on this basis:
‘......when we write a story, our readers are free to respond and we provide them a venue to do so...... but once we enter a debate personally through social media, this would be equivalent to allowing a reader to write a letter to the editor–and then publishing a rebuttal by the reporter. It’s something we don’t do.’
And so we have an organisation, a great brand to boot, more than happy to embrace social media to promote content, but not so much when it comes to engaging and using the medium as intended. In other words they were using a dialogue medium with a monologue mindset.
Is your business like that? What kind of mindset do you have in your business?
Secondly, is your business geared up to engage in dialogue in real time? You might have the will to do so but do you have the capability? Too often there are businesses out there who either do not want to deal with customers by e-mail or when they do, promise to reply with something like 5 working days. You cannot do this with social media. You need to dedicate resources, and empowered resources at that, to monitor what is being said to you and about you, and to be able to respond in real time.
And thirdly, can you produce enough interesting, engaging and relevant content to keep your twitterati followers and friends satisfied? These media are content hungry and if you want your brand to offer something of value to customers and prospects alike, you need to be able to provide a constant stream of content. Go on Facebook or even visit some company websites and see when last updated. Out of date or non current material highlights that you don’t care. It’s like a shop with a broken light bulb.
Yes social media can be a great force for good for brand and can demonstrate modernity, trust and a willingness to engage but if you are going to put yourself on Facebook or Twitter, please get it right. Get it wrong and your brand will end up damaged. And there is no greater crime.
Is it only me..........but I doubt Nelson would have turned a blind eye to this.
Last week it was reported that a Navy medic had been court-martialled because he did not want to carry a gun and learn how to shoot it on ‘moral grounds’. I think he must have got his application forms mixed up and he thought he was joining the Boy Scouts rather than the Royal Navy.
What did he think was going to happen when he joined the Royal Navy? Maybe he just didn’t realise that the ships of Drake, Raleigh and Nelson were part of our Armed Forces. Look closely and you will see the word ‘Armed’, Mr Jack Tar. Is that not a bit of a hint to you? Or did you just think that it was for people with arms? And what did you think the great big metal tubes stuck onto that big grey boat where you slung your hammock, were for? Balance.
Now I can accept that you might not want to fight on ‘moral grounds’ and I take my hat off to anyone who refuses to fight for king and country on moral grounds but what you don’t do, if those are your sincerely held views, is join one of our Armed Forces. (There we go again, it is so obvious you can’t help mentioning it.)
Presumably if you take this stance and join an institution like the Royal Navy you don’t think it immoral for someone else to carry arms to cover your backside. And when we say arms here we mean the kind that can shoot ordnance over vast distances. Not the kind that contain fingers.
Now maybe it’s just me but when the likes of Drake, Raleigh, Nelson and Perry signed up, they did so in the full knowledge that at some point they might be required to fight. Indeed, for some of the aforementioned, fighting Johnny Foreigner was exactly why they signed up. It is surely not too much to ask that today’s successors to the aforementioned make at least some attempt to follow their lead.
As a taxpayer I pay for 24x7 armed guard security coverage so that I can go to my bed knowing that when I wake up this will still be a green and pleasant land where we, Britons, will never ever be slaves. I don’t want those providing the levels of security I pay for being able to pick and choose which enemy they are going to fight or even if they will turn up for duty looking armed and dangerous. You joined up, deal with it or quit and join the RAC.
Have a great week.
Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Friday 22 July 2011
Friday 8 July 2011
Twittering on
It seems that last weeks’ musings almost got too much for one devoted reader. Difficult to believe that Cicero’s words of wit and wisdom might have brought a tear to someone’s eyes. Another first for Cicero though it was probably grit.
It is unlikely that this week’s thoughts will provoke a similar emotional response but we will see.
In today’s world it seems that every business and every brand has or wants its own Facebook site, its own Twitter account, and almost on a daily basis Cicero is asked his thoughts on the relevance of these new media applications. This is of course rather strange given the generation to which Cicero belongs but I suppose it is a testament to the marketing genius of the Man that his advice is sought on a wide manner of marketing issues.
But should all brands have a Facebook site and tweet?
Now on the one hand Cicero would advise that for brands to be seen as modern and up to date being au fait with today’s manner of communications would help signify this. And it could be argued, as some have done, that by not employing these customer communication and engagement tools your brand might somehow be seen as untrustworthy and unwilling to talk directly to its customers.
But before we all get carried away and jump on this particular bandwagon Cicero would advise more considered thought. After all getting it wrong could be even more brand damaging.
It is clear from a cursory view of the social media horizon that some brands are better at brand building through social media than others, if the number of Facebook Friends and Twitter Followers some brands have is anything to go by and the level of engagement these Friends and Followers have with the brand.
But Cicero would contend that those brands which are successful on these media are those which offer extraordinary functional benefits, or where the brand offers fabulous social benefit such as charities or a cause, or where the brand is a powerful expression of self. In other words me too brands are unlikely to cut it and maybe only brands whose offering is truly innovative and differentiated should think about using social media to leverage innovative and differentiation.
To better understand this, walk down your High St and consider the brands on offer there, assuming of course they have not yet shut down. How many of these would you like to follow on Facebook or Twitter? How many of these would you like to engage in conversation with?
When Cicero was a young pup and long before anyone had even thought of something like Twitter, a very clever man identified four reasons for people to talk about brands. The first is because of product-involvement: the experience is so novel and pleasurable that it must be shared. The second is self-involvement: sharing knowledge or opinions is a way to gain attention, show connoisseurship, feel like a pioneer, have inside information, seek confirmation of a person's own judgment, or assert superiority. The third is other-involvement: the speaker wants to reach out and help to express neighbourliness, caring, and friendship. The fourth is message-involvement:the message is so humorous or informative that it deserves sharing.
Now these findings may come from a different era but Cicero fancies they might still apply to today’s brands.
And so before you start to twitter on, do you really know what kind of brand you might have? Does your brand fill any of the criteria above?
And next week Cicero will consider what your brand must do to make your twittering on effective. Don’t miss it.
Is it only me...............but why can’t people leave well alone.
Last week I bought a new mobile phone. My old one had been dropped on its head too many times and for reasons that no one could explain, some chip or other had got busted so that when the phone was in use, I could no longer hear the party at the other end of the call. And let me tell you that is a huge disadvantage in a phone given that it makes two way conversations a tad difficult.
And so I went looking for a new phone.
My requirements are simple-I want a phone to make and receive calls and I want a phone through which I might send the occasional text that friends and acquaintances might know that I am still alive. I do not want a camera, I do not want it to play music, I do not want to watch my favourite TV programmes on it and nor do I want it make me a cup of tea in the morning.
Do you know how difficult it is to find a phone that it is just a phone?
And then when you do find a phone that seems to meet even the most basic of requirements and you get it home and take it from the box, to use the instrument you have to learn a whole new language as the Graphical User Interface, or GUI for short (I can tell you impressed by that one) has changed out of all recognition in the name of ‘progress’. So far I have missed 5 calls because I can’t find the answer button.
Now this might only be me but why can’t technological companies leave well alone. Not all of us are digital natives, many of us of a certain age, and there are a lot of us out there as the pension and welfare industry are about to find out, are immigrants to this world.
Our needs are simple, basic and straightforward. We want a phone that is a phone. End of. And we want the buttons, GUIs and layout standardised. Life is too short for us to waste it learning new languages every time we buy a new phone. Hope you are all listening. Or should I send a text.
Have a great week.
Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.
It is unlikely that this week’s thoughts will provoke a similar emotional response but we will see.
In today’s world it seems that every business and every brand has or wants its own Facebook site, its own Twitter account, and almost on a daily basis Cicero is asked his thoughts on the relevance of these new media applications. This is of course rather strange given the generation to which Cicero belongs but I suppose it is a testament to the marketing genius of the Man that his advice is sought on a wide manner of marketing issues.
But should all brands have a Facebook site and tweet?
Now on the one hand Cicero would advise that for brands to be seen as modern and up to date being au fait with today’s manner of communications would help signify this. And it could be argued, as some have done, that by not employing these customer communication and engagement tools your brand might somehow be seen as untrustworthy and unwilling to talk directly to its customers.
But before we all get carried away and jump on this particular bandwagon Cicero would advise more considered thought. After all getting it wrong could be even more brand damaging.
It is clear from a cursory view of the social media horizon that some brands are better at brand building through social media than others, if the number of Facebook Friends and Twitter Followers some brands have is anything to go by and the level of engagement these Friends and Followers have with the brand.
But Cicero would contend that those brands which are successful on these media are those which offer extraordinary functional benefits, or where the brand offers fabulous social benefit such as charities or a cause, or where the brand is a powerful expression of self. In other words me too brands are unlikely to cut it and maybe only brands whose offering is truly innovative and differentiated should think about using social media to leverage innovative and differentiation.
To better understand this, walk down your High St and consider the brands on offer there, assuming of course they have not yet shut down. How many of these would you like to follow on Facebook or Twitter? How many of these would you like to engage in conversation with?
When Cicero was a young pup and long before anyone had even thought of something like Twitter, a very clever man identified four reasons for people to talk about brands. The first is because of product-involvement: the experience is so novel and pleasurable that it must be shared. The second is self-involvement: sharing knowledge or opinions is a way to gain attention, show connoisseurship, feel like a pioneer, have inside information, seek confirmation of a person's own judgment, or assert superiority. The third is other-involvement: the speaker wants to reach out and help to express neighbourliness, caring, and friendship. The fourth is message-involvement:the message is so humorous or informative that it deserves sharing.
Now these findings may come from a different era but Cicero fancies they might still apply to today’s brands.
And so before you start to twitter on, do you really know what kind of brand you might have? Does your brand fill any of the criteria above?
And next week Cicero will consider what your brand must do to make your twittering on effective. Don’t miss it.
Is it only me...............but why can’t people leave well alone.
Last week I bought a new mobile phone. My old one had been dropped on its head too many times and for reasons that no one could explain, some chip or other had got busted so that when the phone was in use, I could no longer hear the party at the other end of the call. And let me tell you that is a huge disadvantage in a phone given that it makes two way conversations a tad difficult.
And so I went looking for a new phone.
My requirements are simple-I want a phone to make and receive calls and I want a phone through which I might send the occasional text that friends and acquaintances might know that I am still alive. I do not want a camera, I do not want it to play music, I do not want to watch my favourite TV programmes on it and nor do I want it make me a cup of tea in the morning.
Do you know how difficult it is to find a phone that it is just a phone?
And then when you do find a phone that seems to meet even the most basic of requirements and you get it home and take it from the box, to use the instrument you have to learn a whole new language as the Graphical User Interface, or GUI for short (I can tell you impressed by that one) has changed out of all recognition in the name of ‘progress’. So far I have missed 5 calls because I can’t find the answer button.
Now this might only be me but why can’t technological companies leave well alone. Not all of us are digital natives, many of us of a certain age, and there are a lot of us out there as the pension and welfare industry are about to find out, are immigrants to this world.
Our needs are simple, basic and straightforward. We want a phone that is a phone. End of. And we want the buttons, GUIs and layout standardised. Life is too short for us to waste it learning new languages every time we buy a new phone. Hope you are all listening. Or should I send a text.
Have a great week.
Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.
Friday 1 July 2011
The hills are alive
Cicero feels that he must take up a few words to respond to the comment last week from Anonymous.
Firstly you will surely agree that Cicero does not ‘ramble’ on the NHS or on any other topic. We like to think that Cicero with forensic precision picks apart the nonsenses of today’s world.
And secondly he does not understand why Anonymous thinks that Cicero will ‘stew and no doubt get quite argumentative’ over the revelation that one hospital Trust is to partner with John Lewis to deliver customer service training and marketing skills. Indeed Cicero applauds the realisation that the hospital requires customer service skills and that John Lewis, a fine brand, is to be the chosen partner.
Cicero does however question the waste of public funds on marketing skills. Given that the NHS is a bloated and inefficient monopoly, to whom does it feel it needs to market itself? If Cicero could make one suggestion-focus on investing in the quality of the product and that includes reducing waiting times, and you will not need a brochure or an ad to market yourself. No doubt you have a Marketing Director and all the cost that entails. Why?
Now Cicero is getting stewed up and argumentative. Time for a lie down and change of subject.
A few weeks back Cicero had the pleasure of walking up some of the finest hills in Wales for the weekend with some of the nicest guys you could ever hope to meet. We added the last bit lest any of them might be joining us here for the week.
It was a miserable trek, even though the company was splendiferous. The weather was wet and windy and the hills steep. It was not long before Cicero’s merry band was damp and water logged but with great determination they resolved to get to the top. And they did. It was a triumph of mind over matter and of ignoring the discomfort, the dampness, the wind, the cold, the shortness of breath, the tightening of muscle, the straining of sinew...............
Now Cicero, as many of you will know, is not the fittest lion in the pack but what he lacks in fitness he more than makes up in intelligence and leadership. On this occasion he was surpassed and in the process he learnt a vital lesson in leadership which maximised the efficiency and effectiveness of the team and ensured that all hit the top of the mountain together.
Please don’t get the impression that Cicero was scaling Everest or K2 or even a mount of the calibre of a Ben Nevis but it was still a steep mound that had to be scaled.
And as we neared the summit with about 300 metres to go and with the wind resistance increasing as the gradient steepened, some of the party were beginning to find the going tough and breaths were getting shorter and shorter. This was the point leadership took over. And the solution was simple.
Without discussion, a meeting or a agreement, The Wee Man took over and organised the party telling them that he would go ahead for 50 metres and when he stopped the next man would follow up the hill and so on and so on until we had all got to the same point when the process would be repeated for the next 50 metres. In this way the team made progress and all got a suitable rest and recovery period to catch breaths. And so as a result of this inspired leadership, the team reached the top.
And this is this week’s learning.
If we all work as a team we can all complete the task in hand, even the weakest members of the team can play their part. It is not that you go at the pace of the slowest but you organise the resources around you in such a way that the weaker members of the team can play their part and make a contribution. All it requires is someone to step up to the plate, like The Wee Man, and to organise solutions that will get everyone there.
And when that happens, all in the team can get to enjoy the view.
Is it only me.....but what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Over the course of the past week we have had the unedifying spectacle of the Two Caesars trying to appease public sector workers before they went on strike. I am glad they failed to avert the walk outs.
And in passing I wish the media would stop characterising the dispute as between the government and the unions-it is between the taxpayer and the unions for in my book the government is merely the representative of the taxpayer in this instance.
And before I get deluged with whines from Apparatchiks pointing out that they too are taxpayers might they be reminded that they pay their taxes from taxes paid by the rest of the taxpaying community. All they are doing is re-cycling the cash.
Now as I understand it the reason the unions have decided to take on the taxpayers is because they resent having to pay more for their pensions, they do not want to work longer before they get their pension and for reasons that escape me they want us, the taxpayer, to continue to underwrite their pension liabilities so they can enjoy a comfortable retirement.
Really? It’s time for them all to wake up and smell the coffee.
No it might only be me but surely what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander and it is time for the Apparatchiks and their union bosses to realise that those of us struggling every day to create value to generate taxes to fund their lifestyles, realised years ago that we would have to pay more for our pensions, work longer and retire with less. It’s to do with demographics, our longevity and falling stock market returns in a low interest rate environment as much as the need to save money.
Maybe an Apparatchik or two out there might like to explain why the rest of us should be paying for someone else to get a better standard of retirement living than we can get.
Let them strike, I say. There is no negotiation to be had with this taxpayer. It’s now time for the Apparatchiks and their union bosses to get real and to join the world the rest of us have been in for a while now.
Have a great week.
Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.
Firstly you will surely agree that Cicero does not ‘ramble’ on the NHS or on any other topic. We like to think that Cicero with forensic precision picks apart the nonsenses of today’s world.
And secondly he does not understand why Anonymous thinks that Cicero will ‘stew and no doubt get quite argumentative’ over the revelation that one hospital Trust is to partner with John Lewis to deliver customer service training and marketing skills. Indeed Cicero applauds the realisation that the hospital requires customer service skills and that John Lewis, a fine brand, is to be the chosen partner.
Cicero does however question the waste of public funds on marketing skills. Given that the NHS is a bloated and inefficient monopoly, to whom does it feel it needs to market itself? If Cicero could make one suggestion-focus on investing in the quality of the product and that includes reducing waiting times, and you will not need a brochure or an ad to market yourself. No doubt you have a Marketing Director and all the cost that entails. Why?
Now Cicero is getting stewed up and argumentative. Time for a lie down and change of subject.
A few weeks back Cicero had the pleasure of walking up some of the finest hills in Wales for the weekend with some of the nicest guys you could ever hope to meet. We added the last bit lest any of them might be joining us here for the week.
It was a miserable trek, even though the company was splendiferous. The weather was wet and windy and the hills steep. It was not long before Cicero’s merry band was damp and water logged but with great determination they resolved to get to the top. And they did. It was a triumph of mind over matter and of ignoring the discomfort, the dampness, the wind, the cold, the shortness of breath, the tightening of muscle, the straining of sinew...............
Now Cicero, as many of you will know, is not the fittest lion in the pack but what he lacks in fitness he more than makes up in intelligence and leadership. On this occasion he was surpassed and in the process he learnt a vital lesson in leadership which maximised the efficiency and effectiveness of the team and ensured that all hit the top of the mountain together.
Please don’t get the impression that Cicero was scaling Everest or K2 or even a mount of the calibre of a Ben Nevis but it was still a steep mound that had to be scaled.
And as we neared the summit with about 300 metres to go and with the wind resistance increasing as the gradient steepened, some of the party were beginning to find the going tough and breaths were getting shorter and shorter. This was the point leadership took over. And the solution was simple.
Without discussion, a meeting or a agreement, The Wee Man took over and organised the party telling them that he would go ahead for 50 metres and when he stopped the next man would follow up the hill and so on and so on until we had all got to the same point when the process would be repeated for the next 50 metres. In this way the team made progress and all got a suitable rest and recovery period to catch breaths. And so as a result of this inspired leadership, the team reached the top.
And this is this week’s learning.
If we all work as a team we can all complete the task in hand, even the weakest members of the team can play their part. It is not that you go at the pace of the slowest but you organise the resources around you in such a way that the weaker members of the team can play their part and make a contribution. All it requires is someone to step up to the plate, like The Wee Man, and to organise solutions that will get everyone there.
And when that happens, all in the team can get to enjoy the view.
Is it only me.....but what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Over the course of the past week we have had the unedifying spectacle of the Two Caesars trying to appease public sector workers before they went on strike. I am glad they failed to avert the walk outs.
And in passing I wish the media would stop characterising the dispute as between the government and the unions-it is between the taxpayer and the unions for in my book the government is merely the representative of the taxpayer in this instance.
And before I get deluged with whines from Apparatchiks pointing out that they too are taxpayers might they be reminded that they pay their taxes from taxes paid by the rest of the taxpaying community. All they are doing is re-cycling the cash.
Now as I understand it the reason the unions have decided to take on the taxpayers is because they resent having to pay more for their pensions, they do not want to work longer before they get their pension and for reasons that escape me they want us, the taxpayer, to continue to underwrite their pension liabilities so they can enjoy a comfortable retirement.
Really? It’s time for them all to wake up and smell the coffee.
No it might only be me but surely what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander and it is time for the Apparatchiks and their union bosses to realise that those of us struggling every day to create value to generate taxes to fund their lifestyles, realised years ago that we would have to pay more for our pensions, work longer and retire with less. It’s to do with demographics, our longevity and falling stock market returns in a low interest rate environment as much as the need to save money.
Maybe an Apparatchik or two out there might like to explain why the rest of us should be paying for someone else to get a better standard of retirement living than we can get.
Let them strike, I say. There is no negotiation to be had with this taxpayer. It’s now time for the Apparatchiks and their union bosses to get real and to join the world the rest of us have been in for a while now.
Have a great week.
Sis felix. Et sis fortunatus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)