Then, I came upon about the 30 second mark. (*Gasp*) According to the video, Gary Vaynerchuk found 1,800 new customers for his family-owned business on Twitter for $0. (Compared to the 200 for $15,000 via direct mail and the 300 for $7,500 via a billboard.)

Free? Are you sure about that?

Yes. $0 for those Twitter customers. Really? Free customers? Really?

There are a lot of great points in this video, demonstrating successful social media initiatives from companies both big and small.

But this one, suggesting social media is free, I can’t get behind. (Maybe I’m inferring too much. But particularly with the above point, the video does seem to at least loosely refer to social media as an outlet for free or incredibly cheap customer acquisition, leads, etc.)

Read the fine print. It’s not free.

I’ll continue following the Gary Vaynerchuk example. Sure, Twitter is free. But there are several factors that impacted his success with Twitter, some monetary, some not.

When considering costs, there is Vaynerchuk’s time. While the Twitter account is free, it takes time to consistently update an account with good, useful content.
What else could he have been doing with that time if he weren’t using it for social media?
Also, if a company doesn’t have a capable, credible, and trustworthy advocate like Vaynerchuk, they’ll have to go hire a marketing company. This company, of course, won’t work for free.

Aside from paying someone to update a social media account (directly or indirectly), there are several other investments to consider that impact the cost of a successful social media campaign. These costs aren’t necessarily monetary, but I think they’re important.

Again with the Gary Vaynerchuk example, lest we forget two very unique things he brings to the table – his personality and his product.

Sometimes informative, sometimes funny, sometimes irreverent, and just about everything in between, there’s one thing you can always expect from Vaynerchuk’s Wine Library TV episodes – that you never really know what to expect.
Not everyone has this personality that will keep visitors wondering and coming back for more. Whether in writing or in video, a compelling personality can go a long way in creating a following.

Then there’s the product. Wine Library TV’s tagline is: Changing the Wine World. They describe the movement as seeking “to break down the barriers, stereotypes, and misperceptions that otherwise prevent people from exploring and enjoying the exciting and rewarding world of wine.”
These stereotypes are there because this movement is something new. There was an untapped market for this casual approach to enjoying wine. Vaynerchuk had a good story to tell: something easy to relate to, useful, and innovative.

For most companies who aren’t fortunate enough to have a great story at the center of their business and/or who aren’t fortunate enough to have a dedicated and interesting personality on their team, they need to think about more.
They may need to rethink who they hire. (More about my thoughts on that here.)
They may need to rethink how they do business, creating a new story (product, marketing angle, etc.) that really gives people something to talk about.

Who gave people this crazy idea anyway?

I think this post – “Have kool-aid drinkers totally screwed the social media space?” – sums up a lot of great points about the problem of people thinking social media is free. As the author states, some points in the article might be controversial. But I definitely think there’s some truth to the idea that the very people that are now trying to convince people that social media isn’t free and easy are the same people that once said it was free and easy:
“Up till a year or two ago, many of us said something similar to this [social media is free/cheap and easy], because we were trying to make companies understand the potential of these amazing tools.

Now they get it. But the problem is, they assume social media is cheap, or FREE. Because that’s what we told them.”

Don’t get me wrong.

I think this Socialnomics video has great evidence that social media can be an effective marketing tool for improving ROI. And I agree. It is a tool for increasing ROI.

But I also think we have a long way to go before we can be too careful or too consistent in avoiding discussions about social media as cheap and easy. People often hear what they want to hear, and if they have the idea that social media is free and easy in their heads, it’s going to take more than a casual mention to change that.

With a theme of what’s next, UnSummit3 was attempting to uncover just what we’re all getting ourselves into as we embark on our grand journey as interactive marketers. Several statements were made in the discussions I was a part of that stated some great possibilities. And, more importantly, they left my mind reeling with even more possibilities.

So, here are my top four takeaways from UnSummit3. An “alternative” conference can’t have a nice, neat top five or ten, after all.

1. Will the onslaught of social media activity turn all of our online selves into boring selves with no personalities?

   Making ourselves known online is easier than ever. Everybody’s a writer. Everybody’s a publisher. Everybody’s a marketer and a brand manager (for themselves).

   Unfortunately, everybody’s also a stalker. Whether it’s related to our career, our love life, or anything else, “Facebook stalking” just might be becoming America’s new favorite pastime.

   As interactive marketers, we can’t afford not to be online. This fact is arguably true for other industries, too. (Or maybe just to maintain some kind of social life.) So, simply removing profiles to avoid the issue completely might not be the best option.

   If we “sterilize” our profiles to the point that we look vanilla – not a sprinkle or cherry on top in site – are we doing ourselves an injustice? Assuming we use common sense, do we really want to work for a place or be part of a group that can’t handle our personalities?

   (I’m not sure who brought up the point of sterilizing profiles, but it obviously made me think. So thank you. And if you happen to read this post, please claim the idea as your own.)

2. Interactive marketing isn’t marketing (or even interactive marketing) as usual.

   This idea began to develop, for me at least, at the MIMA Summit (and no, I’m not going anywhere near the Summit vs. UnSummit argument…). Our goal as interactive marketers today is really to connect with our most vocal customers (the 1%), and then, let them do the marketing – talking about the product, telling everyone how great it is, etc.

   Of course, we need to communicate brand and the basic product features and benefits. But then, it’s our job to listen to customers. So we’re finders and we’re listeners, but then what’s next?

   Then, we need to take what we hear back to the company and use it to create a better product, service, or company. So, the possibilities of what an interactive marketer might become are nearly endless: organizational developers, customer service managers, product developers, and more.

   In the agency model conversation, @paulisakson brought up a great point about this situation we’re in as marketers, and how it really builds in the possibility for better companies. Essentially, we should be able to save money by letting our customers do the marketing, instead of buying expensive ad space or designing expensive campaigns. Instead, we can take this money back to the company for product or business development. If things really began to work out this way, everybody wins.

3. Social media might seem like a fun fantasy world, but, this just in, the “real world” can see it, too.

   From career concerns to legal issues to business policies, a lot of the fear surrounding social media could be taken away by just remembering some basic common sense. (Getting to be an oldie, and not directly related to interactive, but so incredibly true – read The Death of Common Sense by Philip K. Howard.) (Also, of course, I realize this doesn’t solve all legal issues.)

   If we wouldn’t say it in “real life”, then don’t say it online. The same real people we talk to offline also happen to be online. Imagine that. And unlike these people’s memories offline, the Internet doesn’t forget. Ever. We’re not paranoid about everything we say offline, and I don’t think we should have to be online either. But we also can’t be stupid.

   A few things to keep in mind? Employees can just as easily make a stupid comment to their entire network of friends and family in the real world as they can online, and there’s nothing we can do about that. And we’ve all heard the tagline: “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas”. Remember the opposite when it comes to social media. What happens on social media sites most certainly doesn’t stay on social media sites.

4. Be succinct, accessible, and useful above all else.

   In the Social Media Reality Check discussion led by @philson, we discussed how everything convenient is winning out among “real people”. Mobile is becoming more common; laptops are often preferred over desktops; people often like Twitter more than Facebook because it’s less cumbersome. If we add too many bells and whistles to things that really aren’t helpful to users, we could end up hurting ourselves more than helping.

   Then, there was the storytelling discussion (with @threevolts, @ sandentotten, and ?? can someone fill me in on the third?). Can the initiative to simplify be applied here, too? I think so. Have we gotten so sucked into the hype and, more or less, fairy tales of viral marketing success that we’re always looking for the biggest, best story to get our customers’ attention? I don’t think we necessarily need rocket ships, robots, or moving parts. Our customers are getting smarter and busier. They just want to know what they need to know. All we really need to do is give them something they can identify with – make them care. If it’s worth talking about – whether it’s covered in glitz and glamour or not – they’ll talk.

Thanks to all organizers, sponsors, and attendees for such great, thought-provoking conversation!

Most attendees could talk about any one statement from any one session for hours, but in the interest of brevity – a favorite with interactive (web) after all – I’ve combined my top ten takeaways from the Summit. (Or at least the sessions I attended.)

Some of these points are overarching ideas I heard throughout the day and others were just some ideas I found extra-profound in specific sessions.

1. The magic number: 1%.
   For many presenters, starting with Jackie Huba’s keynote and continuing to my last session with Scott Monty, the magic 1% of your audience was a topic.
   You must reach the 1% of your audience who will be vocal and who will influence others. Then, the rest will come along. Get some of this 1% to defend you and be proactive in doing so, and you may just be set for life.
2. Interactive is already leading traditional media.
   We often talk about the way that everything is moving to digital. But, overwhelmingly, we’re already there – particularly when it comes to marketing. To kick off the Summit, Jackie Huba gave several examples of traditional media amplifying buzz that started on the web. The examples continued in session after session all day.
3. Always be “on”. Response time, planning time, projections – everything is shorter.
   Crisis time is minutes, not days or weeks. Your customers are online after “business hours” and on the weekends. Not only is there a short time-span for crisis situations, there’s a short time span for implementing your campaigns, too.
   You can see a big change in a short time. According to Scott Monty, Ford became the #12 most social brand in just months, rather than in the 3 years the company planned for their goal. Instead of planning for years, make “bite size” plans.
4. You don’t control your brand.
   You can try to influence your brand, and you can be pretty successful with it. But the days when marketers could scream about their brand at the top of their lungs and that was the brand – they’re over. As Seth Godin succinctly put it during his keynote, “Your brand isn’t what you say it is, it’s what other people say it is.”
5. Social media is measurable.
   Social media marketing may not be measured exactly as we’re used to measuring marketing, but it can be measured. There are tools out there to measure the buzz and even some tools to measure ROI, like the Social Networking ROI Calculator Laura Chavoen mentioned in her presentation. (Haven’t had a chance to look at this yet – does anyone know where I can find the presentation?)
   People are already tracking ROI. Lee Odden gave some great examples: Dell has generated $3 million in sales from their Dell Outlet Twitter account, and Umi, a sushi restaurant in California, knows they get about 5 new guests every night who heard about them on Twitter.
   In an even simpler, more logical way, though, if people talk about your brand online, and some of those people buy from you, you’ve been successful.
   Finally, social media marketing gives us something new and very important to measure – engagement. Before social media marketing, relationships with your customers were much harder to measure.
6. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
   We all know we’re in the midst of a completely new form of marketing that’s at times both invigorating/exciting and overwhelming/frightening. What was clear throughout the day, though, is that interactive marketing, particularly social media marketing, means nothing without some of the basic marketing principles that have held true since the beginning of time.
   Every session I attended said to start your work with a clear set of objectives. Again, Seth Godin stated this concisely when he gave his steps for creating a movement with your brand. The first step was to be remarkable (worthy of remarks). If you haven’t completed this step, he says, you have to go back to it and start again before moving on. So, if you don’t have a good product and some sound objectives for telling people about it, all the fancy interactive marketing in the world isn’t going to make it remarkable. (As Seth also said, you can’t just “sprinkle some of that fancy new media stuff on top”.)
7. Our role as marketers is changing; we’re listeners and relationship builders, and in some ways, our customers are the marketers.
   As marketers, we’re now in the business of listening to our customers online, and then taking this information back to shape our businesses. Of course, there’s general awareness to be created. A creative, attention getting story or a great promotion doesn’t hurt either. But if we listen enough to create a great brand, our 1% (vocal customers) will catch on and take care of the marketing for us.
8. Be relevant and genuine; provide value.
   There’s an overwhelming amount of information available to people today. Sending out content without a purpose isn’t going to get you anywhere. Neither will sending your message out to anyone and everyone. If someone has no interest in your product/service, it doesn’t matter what content you throw at them or through which channel, they still won’t care.
   Tell a real, genuine story that’s worth talking about to people that want to talk about it. It’s not too hard to imagine, then, that these people will talk about it.
9. Track your efforts, and listen to the data.
   Data isn’t everything and no one is suggesting you get too focused on it. But it can help you determine what’s working, so you can stop what’s not. You might make a mistake, but if you realize this mistake, it’s never too late to improve. While consistency and staying true to your objectives are important, don’t cling to something that’s just not working.
10. Social media is risky and scary, but that doesn’t mean we should ignore it.
    Your customers are talking about you. Not paying attention doesn’t mean it’s not happening; not taking them seriously doesn’t make their issues go away. (I liked Laura Chavoen’s reference to ROI as ramifications of ignoring.) Jumping into social media and talking to your customers can be nerve-wracking, but they’re going to talk whether you’re there or not. So, wouldn’t you like a chance to influence them?

What a comforting statement – especially for those of us that went to college for four years…at the very least.
But really, when it comes to writing for the web, this statement is a good rule of thumb.

Of course, forgetting everything is an overstatement. Grammar and some writing basics are always important. But, a lot of what we’ve learned, we need to work to overcome each time we write for web.

Writing more – with big words and flowery sentences – does not make you seem smart. It just makes you annoying.
Writing a lot doesn’t make you seem knowledgeable about a topic. It makes you forgettable – because no one is ever going to get to the end of your piece.

With all things web hurtling toward us at the speed of light, it’s clear that the web is the way of the future. Actually, it’s already kind of the way of today.

So, when are we going to stop teaching fluffy writing? When will we have educated people who don’t have to unlearn and who can just get better at doing?

Have we started yet?

If a Google search for “web writing class” is an indication, not really.

The top few listings included:

1. www.sciencesitescom.com
   This site offers a two-day workshop. I couldn’t figure out much more about the organization offering it. The site didn’t work in my browser. (Not saying much for the workshop, teaching web-related skills and all.)
2. www.hwg.org
   The HTML Writers Guild offers a six-week course. It covers a good range of topics, including web reading habits, search engine rankings, effective writing and formatting tips, web design, creativity, and even measuring success with web analytics.
3. www.webwritingthatworks.com
   This course is a two-day in person workshop or a six-week online workshop. Again, for a site teaching web writing, not terribly impressive. Text is broken up with headings, but it’s very long. (I didn’t want to read it, so I may not be describing all this information right.) Inconsistencies in the bullet point writing – also not impressive.

The other listings making up the top ten? All online courses or workshops. While some sites were credible, none were for educational institutions.

Ironically enough, a search for “web writing college” first lists a page on Dartmouth.edu with tips for writing an academic paper. Far from effective web writing tips.

A search for “web writing university” brought up more of the same. Halfway through the page, there was a listing for Oxford. This page was just a guide housed under a section describing the University’s Web Strategy Group.

Maybe educational sites just aren’t optimizing for search?

My research for this post was very brief – by no means conclusive. But I thought maybe schools offered the classes, they just weren’t showing up in search results.

So I went to the source.

Amherst College was among the top liberal arts colleges for 2010. One of the easier college sites to navigate, I reviewed their course offerings in the English department. Among them: Reading and Writing About Nature, Writing Poetry I and II, Screenwriting, Writing Fiction I and II, and The Graphic Novel.

Students studying writing in college are much more likely to end up writing for a website than they are writing poems or graphic novels.

I know there are creative schools out there for advertising or design that offer courses for more specific types of writing.
But the web is more than mainstream today. Shouldn’t creating content for it have the same coverage?

And another thing…

An aside, but to take this just a step further, can the succinct qualities of web writing please conquer all other types of writing? Legal writing, fine print, academic pieces. Of course, there are some reasons these types of writing are the way they are. Really, though, no one wants to spend an hour reading something that they could read in ten minutes.
If the point of content is not to be creative and entertaining, then why should we have to wade through the fluff?

In closing – web writers – please try to conquer the world. Just a small task to ponder.

The variety of experience represented in the audience created an excellent discussion with valid points and even more valid questions (which, in the end, related to big organizations as much as small; internal use as much as external).

Anyone could probably write for pages and pages about each of the points discussed. So, I’m choosing a few points, that together, made me think about larger implications.

(I wish I could credit the people who made these original points, but unfortunately, I’m not sure who they were. If you somehow find this post, and it was you, out yourself and your opinions, please!)

So, back to those points:

• The In Crowd:
  With easy content creation and access to content from anywhere in the world, social media makes it clear – something’s going on out there. And if something’s going on, we want to be a part of it. Nobody wants to be left behind while their friends, coworkers, or entire industry charges ahead without them.
• Addiction:
  We often receive social media content on our mobile phones, which makes us more likely to read it. Even if we wouldn’t read the same content on a website (computer), somehow, on a phone, it’s more appealing. Why is it appealing? Whether it’s novelty or something else, you really can’t argue that most people consider content via mobile convenient and fun. Because it’s so convenient and fun and because we want to be in, it naturally follows that it’s easy to become addicted.
• It’s a Culture Thing:
  If an entire organization, from top management to newest employee, doesn’t buy into social media, it will never work. The culture has to be on board for a complete, genuine, and responsible social media presence. The transparency that comes from such a strategy is rarely, if ever, absent from a successful social media presence.

These first two points are very closely related; we want to be part of what’s going on. So much so, that it becomes an addiction. Of course, these points could be said about anything, not just social media usage. Everyone, at one point or another, wants to be part of the in crowd, whether it’s the popular or trendy crowd at large or fitting in with our own small circles of friends or even our families.

Taken together with the third point – about an organization’s culture – is what made me think:

Is social media usage inherently part of our culture already?
Do we, as a culture, just need to breakdown existing stereotypes, so we can see social media for its purpose – genuine, transparent communication in a convenient, fun way – rather than a new, and for many, intimidating medium?

The social media guru. Full of mystique, glamour, a hip vocabulary, and…wait… what’s a social media guru?

There’s a lot of discussion about these elusive creatures within the Internet marketing community. What makes a guru? What doesn’t? How do you become one?

Google “social media guru”, and you’ll find listings including:

• “Biggest Mistakes Made by Social Media Gurus.”
• “How to Pick Your Social Media Guru.”
• “Expulsion of the Social Media Gurus.”
• “UK’s Female Social Media Guru 2009.” (Not necessarily defining a guru or how to get one, but a pretty funny listing, I thought.)

Buzz words and popularity don’t make an expert.

The main discussion, of course, is that many people claim to be gurus or experts with social media, and there’s very little anyone can do to stop them. They breeze into a business and mesmerize with cool terms (and I use the term “cool” loosely), like blogosphere, twittersphere, web 2.0, hash tag, widget, and avatar.

Surely, if someone knows these buzz words, they must know how to market your business with them, right?

Of course, not.
That’s like saying someone who can throw around the medical vocabulary she learned on Grey’s Anatomy is capable of operating on you. Not a medical guru. Not okay.

Well, look at all the Facebook friends this guru has, you say?

Friends? Really? Since when did the smartest kid have all the friends? Maybe before a big exam. The rest of the time, he sat alone at lunch with his books.

There’s a lot of great articles out there on how to identify a social media marketing firm to represent your business. Find an informative, succinct one on the Star Tribune’s website:
Five Key Questions to Ask a Social Media Firm

Now, onto my real point…

Seriously. Why does this term even exist?

In writing this post, I’m guilty of fueling the fire, but stop and think about the term: social media guru.

At the risk of being unbearably cliché - but to further make my point about how bizarre this term is – some dictionary definitions for guru are…

• A person with knowledge or expertise.
• One who is an acknowledged leader or chief proponent.

Do you really want to leave a large part of your online presence up to someone who’s an expert at social media itself?

There’s a reason everyone from your 13-year-old neighbor to your grandpa is on Facebook. It’s easy. Hit a few buttons – and voilà - you have an online presence.

These people know how to talk to their friends via social media, how to keep in touch with family and post pictures.

Of course, what your 13-year-old neighbor and your grandpa don’t know is anything about marketing. They can’t give you a strategy. They can’t help you find the right audience among millions of Facebook users. They certainly can’t figure out how to engage all of these people or make them interested in your product or service.

What you need is a marketer.

You need someone who knows how to develop a strategy and a following that will lead people to… you guessed it… spend money with your business. Of course, everyone says they want to have a conversation with their customers, but they really want to make some money. At the very least, they wouldn’t mind it.

And, as I mentioned above, because social media is easy, any smart marketer is capable of figuring out how to use it.

I know my preference won’t make this term disappear. But if it can’t go away, can we at least call them social media marketing gurus?

This advice pretty much goes for any type of marketing today; it’s a fair estimate that no matter who your target audience is, they’re stressed out and over stimulated. The advice is especially useful for – believe it or not – website usability.

When designing a website, it’s a common recommendation to maintain certain conventions:

• A log in box is in the upper right.
• The logo is in the upper left.
• Privacy policies and terms and conditions are in the footer.
• A shopping cart icon takes you to a page where you see the items you’ve decided to buy.
• A magnifying glass denotes site search.

Of course, if everyone maintained every convention, websites would get stale quickly. Other than color changes and imagery, you wouldn’t recognize one site from another.

Some conventions go for anyone – like the shopping cart and search. But sometimes, the conventions for an industry are nothing more than “the way we’ve always done things”. And in most of these cases, this way isn’t a good one.
Just because your audience is accustomed to something doesn’t mean they like it. It just means they don’t have an alternative.

Wouldn’t it be great to be the first alternative? The breath of fresh air for an audience who’s been oppressed by boring, difficult to navigate websites for years?

Of course it would be great. But how do you do it?

Don’t look to your industry – often the people who have been and are doing it wrong. Look to the other places your audience hangs out online.

Your audience doesn’t exist in a vacuum, with interest only in your services.  If you’re a law firm, your clients do more than look for a lawyer. If you’re a family lawyer, you can bet your clients have families. What other kinds of sites do people with families visit? School or educational sites? Sites for kids’ clothing or food?

Find the best sites in industries with which your target audience is involved, and take a cue from them. Borrow these conventions for a site that will delight your visitors.

Earlier this month, GM provided a wonderful real world (versus world wide web) example of borrowing conventions from other industries.

With such a diverse audience, the connection is simple: people who shop for vehicles also shop for other things. And when we shop, most often, we can return what we buy. This no-strings-attached feeling makes the decision to buy much less stressful.

New shoes. Not sure if you want them? Take them home. Walk around in them. Don’t want them anymore? Simply bring them back, and they’re out of your life forever.

So, GM decided to offer the same thing for their vehicles: returns.
Their “May the Best Car Win” campaign offers a 60-day money-back guarantee on all new vehicles. (There are a few requirements. Read more about the campaign here.)

Only time will tell if this tactic will pull GM out of the dire situations they’ve found themselves in over the past few months. But one thing’s for sure – it’s gotten them some attention.  Just after its launch, news shows featured the campaign. A Google news search for “GM 60 day money back guarantee” brings up over 1,000 results, all of which seem to accurately reference the campaign.

GM may not have made all the right decisions, but I think this campaign is a great reminder for marketing anywhere. An age old convention for one industry is a revolutionary plan for another.

We already know the web has revolutionized the way we do things. As trite as the term “digital revolution” can be, it’s a very accurate description of the last few years in our society.

It’s definitely revolutionized how we travel – from finding directions via Google Maps to buying plane tickets on Expedia.

It’s revolutionized the way we shop. Can’t get it locally? No problem – when we can shop anywhere, globally.

Examples could go on forever. From online activities to the very way consumers are in control now, rather than companies.

All of these ideas are discussed in circles everywhere online and offline.

Recently, though, a few articles made me think about some even bigger shifts in our society – the next big things to be revolutionized, if you will.

First, a bit more about digital marketing.

A few months ago, results of a Wetpaint and the Altimeter Group study announced a great answer to the infamous question social media marketers face…
“What’s the ROI on social media?”
(Without fail, usually one of the first questions all businesses ask about social media – whether they’re skeptical or not.)

Of course, the quick answer is:
“It’s about engagement, not conversions.”
But this study actually found that deep engagement with customers through social media correlates to better financial performance.

The most engaged companies in the study saw an 18% increase in revenues over 12 months. Compare these companies to those who weren’t engaged and saw a 6% decrease in revenues over the same period.

So, sure, it’s great for engagement, but ROI, too? Even better.

The catch. The companies who had the biggest increases in ROI were deeply engaged. This study defined deeply engaged as having:

“…dedicated teams, however small, active in the social media channels they utilize. The study found that the most successful teams evangelize social media across the entire organization to pull in a broad range of stakeholder.”

You can read more about the study here, but what struck me was the evangelization of social media across an entire organization. A large undertaking.

Now, my actual point: the next big revolution…maybe.

Another article I recently read discussed customer loyalty –  more difficult with the less personal nature of online customer interaction.

For better loyalty, Gary Edwards, Executive Vice President of Client Services for customer experience management company Empathica, recommends “ensuring that all employees – from the top down – know your mission and live that mission while at work.” (Read more about this one here.)

So, now, some equations:

• Deep customer engagement through social media = increases in revenue
• Deep engagement through social media = evangelization of social media across an entire organization
• Customer loyalty = ensuring all employees know and live your mission while at work

To me, it seems these points are saying:
To have loyal customers that are going to continue spending money with you, you better have some loyal employees you trust to evangelize your brand.

Yes, in simple ways, the web has already revolutionized hiring. Another equation:

• Pictures of horrifying behavior on Facebook ≠ responsible adult career

But, does a move to how companies find success – by completely and totally engaging with customers online, anytime, anywhere – mean the web is about to further revolutionize how we’ll hire employees in the future?

Sure, a potential employee might have a clean, innocent Facebook page and an impressive LinkedIn profile, but can she be trusted to engage with customers? Can she properly communicate the company culture, mission, and more to them, all without supervision?

In some companies already completely dedicated to social media, this revolution may have happened. In other companies that haven’t jumped on the social media bandwagon, might this movement to genuine online engagement strategies impact hiring – whether companies are primarily online or not?

If shopping, travel, or any number of other examples are any indication, this change will be the case. Digital is still revolting, and we’re all just along for the ride, wherever it might take us.

It’s easy to look at “traditional” media like the yellow pages and see how they’ll need to be very creative to keep up with all things digital.

But what about those of us working in digital industries?

It’s easy for us to forget that our industry is always changing. Sometimes, it seems, at the speed of light. If we’re not careful, it might not be long before we’re hanging out on the curb with the yellow pages.

Researching a direct mail site one day, I came across a banner ad for MRM Worldwide with this tagline:

“In an evolving digital landscape, useful is the new clever.”

This concise statement is itself useful and clever. It sums up what it’s easy to miss with the constant change of digital industries.

Take for instance, again, the example of the yellow pages. Many companies that used to offer yellow page advertising are now offering a modified version of pay per click advertising. However, these pay per click ads are often first routed through a “storefront” or profile page on the company’s site. The ads don’t link directly to the the site for the company in the ad.

First, this isn’t useful for the end consumer. Adding an extra step to get to the site they want to visit doesn’t help them.
Second, this isn’t useful for the advertiser. With added barriers, it’s more likely that their consumers will never make it to the information they want visible – the content on their website.

What’s most useful for these previous yellow page advertisers and their customers? Probably to work with an experienced search engine marketing professional that will send targeted traffic to an actual website. Useful for consumers. Useful for advertisers.

With the saturation of the Internet with blogs, social media, and just plain websites, competition keeps growing.  In turn, so does noise for consumers. It only makes sense, then, that we, as consumers, gravitate toward what’s useful for us.

A clever ad might get our attention, but if it’s not backed up by a useful service or product, we probably won’t do anything more than think about it in passing.

Of course, how to be useful is another story. And it’s not an easy story to tell either. I think this tagline, though, is a great place to start: “…useful is the new clever”.

Of course, this example is an extreme. But sometimes, after getting absorbed in some intense competitor research, we might find ourselves a bit closer to this scenario than we’d like.

No, we’re not going to blatantly rip off a brand name like Coke. But what about “borrowing” just one piece of a competitors’ overall strategy?

Just about every company that bottles beverages has offered the prize on the cap promotion. Who did this promotion first? Did the company that followed put their own spin on it?

With a lot of creative work – marketing or otherwise – we don’t always want to reinvent the wheel. If everyone had to come up with completely original ideas all the time, creative projects would take a lot more time – and be a lot more frustrating.

If a strategy was successful for a competitor, it’s clear they were on to something. If we reuse that something, though, will our customers realize it? If they do, will it impact us negatively?

How much of our own flavor do we need to add to a marketing idea to avoid the risk of being labeled as a cheap knock off…or worse, a joke? Just how much do we need to reinvent the wheel?