Jessica L. Owens

In the past century, we’ve seen some great new technology that allows others to maximize their use and efficiency of certain products and services. Consumers love this technology, and it tends to become a great hit. Manufacturers and suppliers of the old processes, products, and services really don’t like this new technology. It’s called the process of destructive technology.

We’ve seen examples of this happening over and over. Many times, the companies of the old products try to persuade government or the new technology owner to limit the use or ability of the new technology just so the old guys can stay in business.

A good leader will learn to respond to this new challenge, they’ll change their business plan, and they’ll come up with something better. Things like destructive technology and competition keep innovation pumping and consumers buying.

In recent years, we’ve seen a couple of great examples of destructive technology: Netflix & the Kindle.

Netflix

Netflix is interesting because they’re just putting a new process on something that was already well established: renting movies. Of course, the movie publishers don’t like Netflix’s new strategy and their ability to stream movies online. Warner Brothers (WB) has taken steps in 2009 to reach an agreement with Netflix so that they can only rent WB movies 28 days after they are available elsewhere on DVD.

Essentially, WB is leveraging their power to potentially damage Netflix market share because Netflix came up with an innovative new way to get people what they want in the most efficient way possible– and people love it. WB should reevaluate their business strategy to shift how money is made if this is damaging their profits instead of forcing other corporations to work in a way that WB feels is acceptable to their profits.

Kindle

You may have seen my recent post or have read in the news about Kindle’s recent fiasco. They were in a “price war” at the end of January and for the beginning portion of February over the price of their e-books. Amazon has built their Kindle brand by keeping bestsellers at $9.99. Beginning with publishing giant, Macmillan, Amazon was forced to raise their prices to up to $14.99 matching the rival iPad’s announcement on average book prices on their e-reader platform.

In economics, the first thing we learned was that price depends on supply and demand. When it comes to electronic products, supply is virtually unlimited! So the price depends on what the demand is… some more basic economics say that when a buyer is shopping for two identical products, they will tend to purchase the cheaper version, leaving competition in the hands of the manufactures in creating a competitive advantage for their product.

How do you get a competitive advantage if the PUBLISHER is influencing it all?! The publishers’ competitive advantage lies in the quality of their books and writers! If they aren’t making the profits, adjust the business plan of the affected company, not the ones who already have a successful one!

I have 2 philosophies that I go by. My classic philosophy is to ask “why?” I do this for a couple of reasons:

• To understand how and why others do things in order to expand my horizons.
• To challenge others to understand why they’re doing things and to ask others step out of line to potentially make processes better.

My most recent philosophy is based on “why” and adds on to it a little more. It’s almost a visual thought process for me. When I hit a brick wall, I picture the problem to be inside a box. I ask myself, “What are the lines or obstructions that are keeping this problem or situation contained?” I ask, are they rules? Are they processes? I think of my first philosophy and maybe ask why they exist? Do they really serve a function anymore? And if not, I find a way to lighten the intensity of that line in the box and find a way around them.

We create the box that we’re trying to think out of. When that brick wall approaches us, how will we get around it? Who or what is blocking the success of what we are trying to do? Why? What resources do I have that I can use to bypass it? When Professor Rummel first mentioned this in my Marketing Management course, I knew she was right, but I didn’t realize how many different situations this applied in. I use this philosophy every single day when I run into a problem or negative situation. If we all used this philosophy, think of how much more efficient we could make the things we do for the next person or next time around.

I returned from my trip on Sunday a little jet lagged and very renewed. I know, you’re thinking that is impossible, but I must interject my friend, it’s very possible. In London, I sat in a conference room with 30 of my classmates listening to Steve Madincea talk about his experiences, as a fellow Michigander, starting an international business in London.

I was incredibly enlightened and slightly intimidated by his courage to continue to tackle the massive feat of starting a company, literally on his wife’s credit card, in a country foreign to him. On top of that, he can continue to succeed in his industry and refuses to take a step down and coast through life. He constantly pushes against the grain to be the best and keep his team performing at their best.

I learned many valuable lessons in that short hour with Steve. The one lesson that I know I can and will apply in any aspect of my life, personal or professional, is to be open-minded. While we journeyed London, we shouldn’t notice that they drive on the wrong side of the road, we should notice that it is different and then find out why. (Back before there were cars, the folks of the UK would pass someone on the left side of the road or path because most were right-handed and could carry their sword in defense).

This is important internationally when working with many cultures. This is also important as a job-seeker looking to potentially adapt to a different corporate cultures. No matter where this skill is used, it is essential. As I continued on to Paris, I was sure to keep this idea in practice and I have certainly brought it home with me. It is good practice for all business people whether the work is local or international. It keeps our attitudes in check and helps adaptation and keeps good business with all types of people and cultures.

I’m reading the book, The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century by Thomas L. Friedman and I’m learning a lot about different tools that individuals can use to start leveraging services that prior to this “flattened” world, only large corporations could afford. Since I’ve started the book, I’ve realized this to be so true- especially in advertising– and even more in digital marketing.

One person can do what a whole corporation used to do.

I met with a new colleague last week, Todd Terwillegar, and he briefly explained his company, how he started, and the people who have been the most influential and helpful people to him while he got to where he is. He’s in his mid-twenties, a 1-man company with a couple of clients, and working towards making his career with his own company. Ten years ago, that would have been impossible.

New online business services such as 1DayLater allow 1 person to do everything.

If you really wanted to, you don’t need a secretary, or a team of employees that manage different aspects of the business processes. There is technology and the internet for that. One can just track it easily and save the hassle.

Full service agencies might, one day, contract all the work out and a small handful of people are permanent.

I’ve been offered many jobs in the past 6 months in advertising for my services of a social media marketer. Every single offer has been as a contractor. This economy has been forcing companies to cut back in ways they never have before. The work still needs to be done, but the money isn’t there to make it happen. Perhaps these jobs will still continue to be contracted out and many in advertising will be their own boss working for a dozen different agencies. There’s good and bad to that, I guess. That is just a part of the world going “flat.”

I’ve seriously applied to hundreds of jobs- maybe even pushing a thousand job applications within the past 6 months or so. I’ve uncovered what seems like every single stone I can to find new openings in my area of expertise. When I feel like I’m at a dead-end but need more to find, sometimes I just find myself Goggling “marketing jobs” or something similar. The results are always something like “MAKE MONEY ONLINE TODAY!” Even if I just search Monster.com the results are similar.

It’s a hard spot to be in because there are so many qualified people with experience that are applying for the same job as I am. It’s hard to even find a legit job to apply for let alone get hired by one.

But as I keep searching and applying, I set my standards low just for the chance of getting hired. I still only try to apply for a job at what seems like a legitimate  company, but when it comes down to it, I really only want to work for a “good” company.

I realized recently, that there are legitimate companies that aren’t “good.” Sometimes people create or run companies for their own benefit and don’t realize what the customer wants or needs. Some companies try to find ways to make their customer think that they need their product. Yes, that’s part of marketing, but the other half of running a sustainable business is after you get the consumer to buy the product, they should like it, and they should come back for more, because they know it’s a good product.

The founders of Google based their company on the customer versus the potential of making more revenue. They constantly sacrifice millions of dollars or more by doing things like no ads on the home page, etc. Their motto is “don’t be evil.” What they really mean is don’t fall into the typical business man’s mind by focusing more on how to make the income bigger and bigger. Google wants to be a company that is focused on what the consumer needs.

In my advertising class, my professor was talking about how TiVo and DVR is ruining the advertising business. I spoke up and explained that I’m going into advertising but I’d never give up my DVR. He thought there was something wrong with this picture and simply couldn’t believe it. TV ads are still relevant but there are obvious signs saying that TV ads could be nearing the end. But that’s not the end of advertising.

I want my job to be the one that finds what works for the company without interrupting what the customer wants. I want to compliment the needs of the customer by giving them what they need exactly when they need it. I want to be that company that consumers seek just as much as we seek them. I don’t want to find a way to push my product in the homes of people who don’t need them just to make a buck.

How many people can say they work for a good company? How many marketers find themselves pushing the product more than it’s getting received? I want to be more than a legit company. I want to be a “GOOD” company. I don’t want to reap benefits that I don’t deserve. I want the hard work to pay off for the consumer and my company.

In one of my recent courses, the professor explained how society needs to look at the meaning of the things we say and do. Individuals need to get to the root of the word and look at it in a literal sense to really understand why we do the things we do and in turn, make better decisions in our business and personal life. This was a 4 credit course so I’m not going to discuss everything we learned related to this, but one of the topics we discussed were the meaning of institutions.

For example, after people attend rituals, do they come out feeling renewed and fulfilled like they learned something new and that the institution ritual was truly beneficial to their wellbeing? Or do most people attend and practice rituals because that’s what they’ve always done? In reality, many people belong to institutions and attend institution rituals for what they stand for not for what they actually do.

Politics is a great example of practiced institutions. Some people call themselves a democrat or a republican. They will only vote for the democratic party no matter who the candidate is and no matter what he or she stands for. “The democratic party is right,” they say, “They’re always right!” Many times, people belong to an institution for what it means to them, not for what the positions the candidates stand for really are. These positions change from time to time and people just change with them instead of looking at what it really means and thinking for themselves.

Have people gotten so stuck in the beliefs of their institutions that they are hurting their institutions? Absolutely! It is okay to go to church and be close to God or whatever individual believers do when they go to their place of worship, but when practicing these rituals, it is important to understand what the ritual means to the religion and what the rituals mean to the individual.

As a citizen of the free world, we have the duty to vote for congressmen and other politicians who we believe will represent our beliefs in government, democracy, and whatever else we believe is right for our country and it goes the same for every institution we belong to, formal or informal.

By only conforming to what the institution condones, we are loosing control of what matters most within the institution. We are losing our voice and becoming robots. We are missing chances to create change and reformation within our institutions. We are missing opportunities to update the institution mission and goals.

As an institution member in many ways and in many institutions, I’m using this philosophy to be a leader in my work, my church, my community and anywhere else that institutions continue to form and exist. I will continue to ask ‘why?’ and learn what my institution means and how it conforms to my beliefs, and not how my beliefs conform to their current ways. I challenge you to do the same in your work and community.

Most people think of survival of the fittest as the person or species that is stronger or more fit, so to speak, than the rest of the species. Many see this as competing with each other to survive.
I’ve recently taken a class on language and the meaning of words. For me, survival of the fittest was one of the most interesting points we discussed. Our book explained this idea as cooperating with one another to survive. Let’s look at this point.

Developing societies depend on their neighbor or another specific individual or two. They need help hauling or planting. They need those that are close to them to survive. To me, that is an example of survival of the fittest by cooperating.

Also as a developed nation, we walk into a grocery store to buy our produce and other food that someone else grows. We purchase items every day that someone else makes. Most of us wouldn’t know how to survive if we had to make our own things and grow our own food. Each of us has or will specialize in trade to make someone elses’ life easier and so that we can all benefit from work. It’s the basics of how society grows.

So in a sense, survival of the fittest is cooperating with each other to survive. As a developed country, we depend on society, but not the man next door. We might depend on the work he does but not necessarily the particular person.

On the contrary, as a free market society, companies and individuals create natural competitions in order to create progress. For example, the computer was invented, IBM created and distributed a “personal computer” to the general public, some time after that, the PC competed with the Mac creating progress to advancements in technology such as the iPod that I’m writing on right now and the laptop that I use every day and even more.

It is important as a business person and future manager to understand this because on the smallest scale, this concept defines progress and how we get there. This concept essentially molds the thought process and actions of each individual who studies it.

So as I struggled with these two opposite concepts of survival of the fittest, I realized any natural competition is the healthiest form of competition for progress. The unhealthy competition is when it is forced into the workforce or any part of society such as personal incentives and goals in a sales community assigned by a manager verses a team goal for that group.

I’m a huge supporter of the free market system and competition that results of it. Therefore, as a future member of the working world and a potential manager, it is important to understand that forced competition is as unhealthy as regulation from the government. It hinders relationships, progress, self-esteem, and leisure time, either collectively or individually.

I was just surfing through my email a few minutes ago and a came upon my favorite statistical reporting newsletter from emarketer. Today’s big headline… behavioral targeting. God’s gift to Earth. The shocker was that the survey that was taken by Annenberg School for Communication at Berkeley Law suggested that users don’t want to see ads targeted to their interests. Not even half of the people surveyed wanted to get targeted discounts or coupons!

My question is why the concern? Are internet users so worried that people are stalking them that they don’t want to save money on their day-to-day purchases? Are users embarrassed at what they’re searching for while they’re online? When working in cyberspace you are your own judge because nobody knows who Joe Schmoe is in real life. So in this case- are users searching for less appropriate things that they don’t want other users to know about (for instance on a home computer)?

Even the young adults who are usually apt to newer ideas were more likely to say no to behavioral targeting according to emarketer. What gives?

Later,

-Jessica Owens

Working at a large corporation has given me great insight to many situations in business. I’ve been able to see different types of conflicts and how to handle it. I’ve also been placed in different conflicts through out my years here, and I’ve learned how to handle different personality types and different working types. I’ve also come upon a personal conflict and I have yet to understand how to handle it. Let me give you some insight.

I was hired into Dow in mid 2006. Times were turning tough for the US but little ol’ Midland and big ol’ Dow hardly felt the punch. Spending was being cut- at least that’s what we were told. I remember that by summer and fall 2007 travel was reduced to domestic and almost eliminated all together. By 2008, travel continued to get reduced and the word was simple: Don’t spend money.

By Christmas 2008, the K-Dow venture failed, travel was non existent and there were rumors that some departments were asked to bring their own pencils to work with them. Then in 2009, it literally felt like a bombshell; family members lost jobs, early retirements were handed out like Christmas bonuses and suicide was not unheard of as the job cuts continued. I still think Dow was better off than the rest of Michigan, but it still wasn’t easy.

As someone who hardly saw the best days of Dow, and someone who has absolutely seen the worst of times at Dow, I saw how many jobs were lost and I knew how to be frugal. We switched from Starbucks to Folgers. We packed a lunch if we had a lunch meeting. We reused note paper. Instead of sending our paper to the recycler, we cut it in quarters and used the back. We stoped printing in color unless someone at a higher level was going to see it. When managers had to travel, we stayed at a Holiday Inn instead of the Marriott Suites.

I almost felt like one of the women of the Great Depression. When you hear of the women who lived through the Great Depression, you hear how they still wash their Ziploc bags to reuse them instead of throwing them out. You see a wealthy family but they still wear their old shirts and patch the worn spots because it’s still wearable.

In 2009 I worked for a department that was “that wealthy family.” This department was the only department in Dow that was seeing decent money coming in from the budgets. A new director came in with a new plan. Upon many other changes was the changing in spending. “Buy a large, flat panel monitor, just in case,” they’d say. Or, “buy a few lunches today, I think the managers have meetings.” “Which color swatch for the walls looks better?” “This carpeting is horrible, I hope to replace it.” “Please buy a mini-refrigerator for each conference room and be sure they’re all stocked with pop and water at all times.” “Make sure my candy jar is well stocked, just put it on the company card.” “Please make sure there is always plenty of Starbucks coffee in the kitchen for everyone.”

My initial feeling was pleasant, I’m not going to lie. Seriously, I got a new monitor that I probably didn’t need. I got a new ergo-keyboard and I was taken care of. But after I got over my ridiculous ego gloat, I was concerned. Maybe some spending is okay or even necessary, but people who would never think to ask for lunch was now asking for a special trip… at least twice a week. Yes we were busy, but so is the rest of Dow. In fact, the rest of Dow may have been that much more busy because half of their co-workers had been cut in the May round up of lay-offs. I was continuously being asked to buy more water, order nicer table clothes for tours, order flowers, and more lunches. My job description my have looked something like, “Money spender…” or “Job stealer!” because that’s what I felt like. I spent thousands of dollars every month on little things like pop, water, and lunch. And another thousand on monitors and computers for people who had a second office in our building and outside of the building people were loosing their jobs, families were packing up camp and their house was probably being foreclosed. How was anything that I was doing right?

I tried to be conservative but got a slap on the wrist because they always needed a surplus, just in case. The times have not passed to where the rest of Dow could spend on extra office supplies let alone lunches and snacks for their employees. I felt like if we were awarded this great spending money from executives who believed in us, we should have been spending it on things like capital, employees, and production supplies. In the end, I moved on to a different department. My ethical compass was just too distorted for me to continue working like that. I had already begun to voice my concern and it would begin to cost me my job if it continued.

_____________

Is it okay to spend on luxuries when others are loosing their job in the same company? Maybe I was conditioned to not spending because I entered the professional workplace at a time when money was tight.

How does one even approach the situation to try and sooth the moral compass? Is the only way to fix it to get out? Am I wrong for wanting out or should I have tried to make it right? Do you need to be at a certain level to have the chance to make a difference? This is an ethical struggle so I understand that HR doesn’t have an opportunity in this equation. I still struggle with the thought, but I’ve moved on. It still doesn’t change that people are still loosing jobs.

There are many people that claim they are social media professionals… bla bla bla. There are MANY companies looking for social media professionals. But how do you know if someone is really a professional or just someone that thinks they are a professional. There definitely IS a difference.

This morning, Augie Ray wrote an article about how to identify a great SMP (social media professional). So I decided to analyze myself to see just how good I really am- and areas for improvement… Below is what Augie suggests with my commentary and personal analysis.

Are they active and professional participants in Social Media? Do they have a blog, and if so, is it updated regularly? Are they on Twitter, and are their tweets enlightening or noisy? Do they participate in LinkedIn groups, and if so, do they engage in insightful discussions or are they merely promoting themselves? I am highly dubious of Social Media experts who are absent or infrequent participants in Social Media.

Blog? Yes. Updated regularly? Somewhat- every time I find something I feel is really worth sharing. Quality over quantity is my motto. Just like my Tweets! Speaking of Tweets… Twitter? Yes. Enlightening? Maybe. Noisy? No. LinkedIn? Yes! Group participation? Absolutely! I actually have had some really compelling discussions… Although, I sometimes find LinkedIn to be spammy, I have found some great links and information from other users. I’ve found some great contacts and hope to continue to participate and learn more.

Do they brag about the size of their Twitter following? A widely-read and respected blog is brag-worthy–traffic, engagement, and authoritative links cannot be easily faked. But an enormous Twitter following is not necessarily a sign of Social Media expertise. Some folks built their following the old-fashioned way–they earned it by being smart people who others want to know and follow–but many others have amassed tens of thousands of followers by using auto-follow tools that collect and follow anyone, regardless of relevance. If a potential candidate brags about the size of their Twitter following and not the influence they have or the way they developed quality followers, proceed with caution.

Twitter following? No… I don’t brag… I think there are a lot of ‘auto follow’ people and promotional people… As you can see in my blog, I’m not a major fan of Twitter. It’s very time consuming to sort through the information to get valuable information. Tools make it easier, but I’m still trying to learn best practices for business and personal use.

How long have they been in the marketing, communications, or PR business? I have met many passionate and smart young people in the field of Social Media, but expertise is not amassed in six or twelve months. There is a definitely a place for young professionals on a Social Media team, but that place shouldn’t be advising large companies or brands about the nuances, ethics, or measurement of Social Media. Professionals with an impressive background in digital, marketing, or public relations are able to ground their Social Media knowledge and recommendations on communication best practices and not simply their own personal experiences on Twitter.

Am I a veteran? Absolutely not. I have worked professionally in social media since January, 2009. There’s not a whole lot I can do to speed up my years of experience. It comes with time- but I do whatever I can do to learn and participate with other veterans. I’m learning this business just like I would learn anything else. With a lot of hard work.

What are their stands on the ethics and laws in Social Media? Social Media offers great opportunities but also substantial risks. We’ve seen many high-profile missteps, such as companies spamming Twitter hash-tags and game developers caught posting fake positive ratings on their own games. Ask your prospective Social Media consultants what their stand is on paying bloggers (they ought to have an extremely cautious approach to cash compensation and instead recommend relevant blogger outreach) or their expectations of bloggers disclosing relationships and remuneration (total disclosure–period).

Ethics- a big one. Ethics are important but it’s a gray area. Spamming in Twitter using hash-tags obviously ruins the point of Twitter. It’s like spam anywhere else- it’s unwanted and gives a horrible reputation to the company. I have learned, though, that as a legit business, it’s easy to use spamming techniques to try and get the word out. I’ve often asked myself where that line is between mass announcements and spamming? Aside from spam- paying people to blog is not something I’ve practiced. People blog for us to get their names noticed and to share their expertise.

Do they start by asking about the audience and goals or by talking about Facebook, Twitter, and widgets? Facebook and Twitter are certainly the headline-grabbing Social Networks of the day, and they likely will be at the top of the Social Media heap for quite some time. Despite that (or perhaps because of that) any Social Media consultant worth your time will not start by reviewing opportunities on Facebook and Twitter. They should begin–as should any professional communications expert–with a thorough understanding of the target audience, their habits, and needs, as well as the goals of the program. For a high-level overview of a smart Social Media strategic process, check out Forrester’s Groundswell POST approach.

It’s the marketing strategy over all. Let me start by saying that social media, as a whole, is a great new way to maximize viral marketing techniques. I believe that the social media marketing strategy is just a piece of the puzzle of the marketing strategy overall. The message needs to be the same, the theme will be the same, and the image is absolutely the same. If there is an individual- or a team- in each area of the marketing strategy, they all must be working together to achieve great things.  This is not about using Facebook and Twitter to change your brand, although, that’s the piece that I would like to work with.

Do they suggest Social Media is free, cheap, and/or easy? There is no cost to set up a Twitter account or a Facebook page; pretty much everything else has a price tag. Monitoring buzz, participating, listening, identifying audience habits, measuring success, designing and programming social applications, fostering relationships with bloggers, building thriving communities, and furnishing relevant content all require time and expense. Beware the Social Media expert who underestimates the investment and time required for a successful Social Media program.

Cost? That’s my only beef with social media. Using applications like Twitter is very time consuming. I’ve already touched on that point. It’s also rather expensive to hire an agency to come up with your brand slogan. Look at the most famous branding campaign in recent history; Nike, Just do it. I can imagine that those three little words didn’t come up overnight. I’m sure the price tag that Wieden & Kennedy came up with wasn’t as small as the slogan was either. My point is, there is a cost to everything. I know just as well as the next guy that time is money. But that’s what business is about. It’s still relatively cheap to manage a social media campaign aside from time. I’ve been working for over 6 months with a budget of… $0.

Do they ground their recommendations and plans in a thorough understanding of your brand? Your brand has a point of view, a voice, a purpose, and points of differentiation from competitors. These brand attributes are no less (and very probably more important) in Social Media than traditional media. Your employees who participate must bring their personalities to their interactions with customers and partners, but they also have to represent the brand. Any Social Media plan not informed by the brand is a one-size-fits-all solution that fails to leverage and enhance consumer perception of the brand.

Branding. A company like CareerEco will have a different voice than, perhaps, a character in a move might. I honestly don’t have any experience in changing from different brands, but I can’t wait to learn more. I do know that there are things I’ll discuss on my personal Twitter that I wouldn’t be discussing with CareerEco followers. That’s just being professional, though!

Do they prepare you and the organization for the ongoing commitment? Some Social Media strategies might be short-term in nature (such as User-Generated Content campaign or Social sweepstakes), but most involve a long-term commitment to listen and participate. Launching and then abandoning a Twitter account, Facebook page or community is almost never the right approach, so it’s vital a Social Media plan consider not only the costs and time necessary to launch the program, but also the resources or investment required to maintain the engagement on an ongoing basis.

Who’s going to maintain this stuff?! That’s what I’m here for! That’s what I expect to happen!

Does their plan include training, monitoring, and defined expectations for employees involved? Assigning an employee or group of employees to participate and manage Social Media profiles, groups, or communities without setting expectations and furnishing support is a recipe for disaster. Employees must be trained on the appropriate use of Social Media tools, told what is expected of them and how their performance will be measured, and monitored and coached on an ongoing basis.

Team work? At CareerEco, I’m pretty much the sole social media manager. We hold weekly meetings together and if others are going to get in on the effort, we discuss specific duties for a particular need in Twitter, LinkedIn, or Facebook.

What is their approach to measuring success? There are two ends of the spectrum to be avoided–Social Media experts who promise ROI and those who suggest or launch plans without any regard for measurement. On the one hand, computing actual financial Return on Investment on Social Media efforts is no less challenging than it is to compute ROI on a television campaign or a customer service program; on the other hand, every business effort should have established metrics (qualitative or quantitative) so that results can be evaluated and used to revise and enhance processes. An appropriate and sensible approach is to define a measurement plan based on the objectives and to execute the means to monitor and evaluate the program per that plan.

How do you measure success in a SM plan? With my experience, we measure success in the amount of attendees we get at our monthly events or the amount of new sign ups related to the amount of effort and traffic in different areas.