Author Archives: Dan Gershenson

25 days to go: Chicago Mayoral candidates still have online work to do.

Now that the Rahm Emanuel Question has been officially answered – in case you’re unclear, he’s officially on the ballot to stay – we can take a look at how our selection of candidates are faring in terms of educating voters in the online world. Sure, shaking hands at an El stop is great PR, but if there’s one thing that the Obama era has taught us, it’s that you can’t underestimate the power of social media in terms of spreading the word about your position on the issues. So I decided to judge our primary candidates – Rahm Emanuel, Gery Chico, Carol Moseley Braun and Miguel del Valle – on how well they are leveraging the online universe to accomplish this goal.

Now let’s check out the results.

Easiest to find in a Search Engine: Miguel Del Valle and Gery Chico.
There’s no reason their campaign site shouldn’t be the first result when a search is done for “(name) for Mayor.” Del Valle and Chico passed the test. Moseley Braun and Emanuel did not.

Blog Champion: Rahm Emanuel
This is the most glaring difference I see between Emanuel and his competitors — some will say Emanuel has more resources and a “Machine” behind him but this is a weak excuse. Blogging consistency can be achieved by just one person if motivated enough and you can’t tell me that Del Valle, Moseley Braun and Chico can’t identify one individual to blog on their behalf. Emanuel (OK, his staff) pumps out posts on a daily basis, often multiple times per day. When given the opportunity to educate or take a position in real time on an issue, Emanuel has succeeded by far.

In contrast, take a look at the other candidates on blogging frequency –Del Valle’s last blog post was 12 days ago. Carol Moseley Braun’s last post was wishing Chicago a Happy New Year on January 4th. The worst offender here is Gery Chico – if he has a blog at all, I missed it and a lot of other people certainly have too. If anything, this group should be keeping pace with Emanuel’s blog frequency. Instead, they’re not even close.

The I-Want-To-Be-Like-Obama Award: I can’t resist. From the color scheme to the font selection to the style of video on his home page, everything on Emanuel’s site feels like an homage to his former boss, President Obama. Regardless of your opinion of the President, I downgrade Emanuel on this point for not looking like his own brand. I understand the direction he takes from a positioning angle – where else could he visually get away with playing up his ties to Obama so closely than Chicago – but I think his site goes overboard in this regard.

Catering to the International Community: Gery Chico
All candidates have Spanish versions of their websites, but give Chico credit for remembering the second largest community outside of Warsaw by enabling his site to be read in Polish. Carol Moseley Braun does the same, but I give Chico the international tie-breaker by having his website able to be read in Chinese as well.

LinkedIn: Nobody.
This makes little sense to me. If the President of the United States could make his LinkedIn address available when he was running for office, why can’t any of these candidates? If all are for improving local businesses, large and small, a LinkedIn badge to the candidate’s page would not only be of benefit, but it would also provide credibility from one business owner to another as they were connected to the candidate — endorsements mean a lot, but I think the candidates have forgotten that it’s not just the ones that get coverage on the 10:00 news that matter.

Mayor of Social Media: Rahm Emanuel
Most have the Facebook/Twitter/YouTube trinity covered but his prolific blogging, Flickr channel and RSS Feeds make Emanuel the best choice for providing his prospective voters multiple ways to stay connected to him after visiting his website. If we’re realistic, most people won’t return repeatedly to a site for information but may agree to receive that information on their terms. Emanuel caters well to all avenues in this manner.

We still have 25 days before Election Day — I have Gery Chico’s countdown clock on his website to thank for reminding me. That means there’s still time for the candidates to make the necessary tweeks online as they press the flesh and kiss babies (really, does anybody still do that?). Emanuel is ahead, but everybody has room for improvement. While some of the channels of social media are in place, the fuel for continuous content is not being supplied as consistently as it should. Or the sites are not being found as easily as they should. It’s incumbent on these candidates, particularly those trailing in the polls, to make sure these areas are tightened up as soon as possible if they want to get comfortable at City Hall.

Calling Out Athletes Who Tweet Irresponsibly

“If he was on my team, I’d be looking at him sideways.”
– Asante Samuel

“All I’m saying is that he can finish the game on a hurt knee…I played the whole season on one.”
-Maurice Jones-Drew

“Hey, there is no medicine for a guy with no guts and heart.”
-Derrick Brooks

“If I’m on Chicago, Jay Cutler has to wait ’til me and the team shower, get dressed and leave before he comes in the locker room!”
–Darnell Dockett

Pretty damning stuff from players around the NFL about Jay Cutler after Sunday’s loss. But now I’m calling out players who think they can just tweet and run. I’m sure this will be taken as bitterness from a Bear fan, but this issue didn’t start on Sunday and it won’t end there either. Tweets against other teams and other players can be harmless “trash talk,” but these tweets were not harmless. They were over the line and misinformed. Even before the full extent of Cutler’s injury was known or that doctors had advised him not to return to the field of play, his peers in the NFL were taking shots at him via Twitter.

Which begs the question: When do agents and teams step in to allow a balance of what is and isn’t fair game?

We know this much – if a tweet was about giving away team secrets, such as plays or observations from practice, the athlete in question would be in trouble through an immediate fine. Beyond that, however, there’s a gray area that needs to be better defined. So let’s do that.

Athletes should be allowed to tweet.
It’s a beautiful thing when athletes and celebrities become that much closer and down to Earth to the rest of us through social media tools. For all the flack Twitter gets as a social media tool compared to Facebook, we’re paying plenty of attention to it. We’re listening to Lebron, Shaq and others who are firing off tweets without giving it a second thought. People in the city of Chicago are talking as much about the aftermath of a game as the game itself because of Twitter.

I don’t blame Twitter, I blame the tweeter.
Limiting athlete usage of Twitter won’t solve anything. Just as I say regarding policies in the corporate world on this subject, you can’t ban social media completely. But you can put guidelines in place to be followed so that while your employees should feel free to use social media, they shouldn’t be allowed to embarrass those they represent without consequence. By the same token, athletes need to remember who they represent. They are employees of companies and endorsers of products. Maurice Jones-Drew is an employee of the Jacksonville Jaguars. He did not represent his employer particularly well upon firing off his tweet. But Twitter was not the problem. We know Twitter can be used just as powerfully for good causes. Instead, would it have killed any of these experts like Maurice Jones-Drew to turn to a person near him and say, “I’m going to rip Jay Cutler on Twitter. Do you think I should do it?” I doubt an agent or a coach would approve, so why did you do it, Maurice?

And now guess what? The next time the Bears see some of these tweeters, don’t be surprised if they put a little something extra on those tackles and blocks. Is it that different than the pitcher in baseball who throws a 95mph fastball suspiciously close to a batter and then the opposing team’s pitcher does the same in retaliation? Is it that different than the basketball player who performs a flagrant foul on another player going for a breakaway dunk?

It’s only different because it didn’t occur on the field of play. And that’s what makes it almost worse. The Bears are angry at themselves but they have a right to be angry at those who disrespected their Quarterback while sitting at home or in a studio. It appears semi-calculated, not in the moment. It was spiteful and jealous from players who were sitting at home, not something that developed on the field between opponents who are otherwise friends off the field.

Guidelines, guidelines, guidelines.
Just as we see in the business world among corporations that allow their people to use social media responsibly by outlining do’s and don’t of using it – and I applaud those who take this more realistic approach to guiding without eliminating – teams have to provide their players with guidelines for using social media tools. It’s not as bad as it sounds. If they can follow a playbook, they can follow rules on how to use social media in the right way. Keep the guidelines sensible instead of restrictive so that the players can have a certain degree of freedom. But in the same breath, establish what constitutes a violation, such as openly questioning the manhood of another player to the world.

I’m not asking them to stop tweeting or posting. I’m asking them to have common sense when they do. To treat the people who worked hard to get their same level with an equal amount of respect. Otherwise, I’m worried what starts as a comment taken the wrong way in the online world is going to turn into a consequence that hardly resembles professional sport in the offline world.

Selling to people who couldn’t care less (at first)

“Hi Mr. Decision-Maker at XYZ Company. This is (your name) at (your company). We’ve been in business since (year) and people love us for our (product/service attribute).”

Click. In case you’re wondering that would be the sound of Mr. Decision-Maker stopping and deleting your voicemail message.

Admittedly, for a long time I sounded kind of like this when I approached marketing decision-makers. Until I realized that they have zero time to talk, they view unsolicited voicemails and e-mails as an intrusion and that’s IF you can get past the gatekeeper secretary.

In other words, they are not waiting on pins and needles for what you’re selling. But I’ve come to learn that with careful study of listening for potential customer pains, you can briefly but firmly whet the appetite of a person to continue the conversation with you. How did I learn this? Primarily from a woman named Jill Konrath, author of “Selling to Big Companies” and the new “SNAP Selling.” She taught me that whether it’s writing a letter, leaving a message or crafting an e-mail, you don’t have to tell your entire story to get someone to take interest in you. You shouldn’t. Instead, she shows you how you can convey an understanding of that prospect’s situation here and now, ultimately leading them back to what you have to offer.

In fact, I learned that Jill Konrath will be coming to the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce on February 10th at 7:00am (speaking at 8:00am). If you have a spare couple of hours that morning, I highly recommend you check it out and pick up her books. If you follow her advice, you’re sure to open a few more doors as the economy improves.

To register for the event, visit the Chicagoland Chamber’s website at chicagolandchamber.org and click on the Event Calendar for February 10th.

 

 

 

A Bears-Packers type of rivalry? Every brand should be so lucky.

It’s not a game. It’s The Game. It’s a game so gigantic that dare I say some fans would rather make sure the Bears just beat the Packers on Sunday and whatever happens in the Super Bowl happens. It’s that important.

Yet, rivalries like this are great for other brands too. So many companies get wrapped up in identifying only their own best traits that they forget how to position themselves in relation to those who stand against them.

Here’s the awful truth about rivals:
We need them and they need us.

Because the drama of our competition makes differences bubble to the surface. That leads to greater education of what we are and are not about. Which in turn greater defines tribes of fans (and enemies).

Coke needs a Pepsi.
Nike needs a Reebok.
McDonald’s needs a Burger King.
PriceWaterhouseCoopers needs an Ernst & Young/KPMG/Deloitte.

Ask yourself – who are such rivals of yours? What do they stand for that you don’t? Why would someone want to buy their product or service over yours? And why would you actually be OK with that rather than try to attract them to your side?

As you’re thinking about that, try to remember that at the end of the day, people may have different reasons as a group to be your fans/customers but that each person has one emotional reason for why they really choose you. For example, I don’t bleed orange and blue for the fact that I’m merely from Chicago. It’s probably because some of the greatest memories I have as a kid are going to Bears games with my Dad, tailgating, watching from bad end zone seats and having the time of my life. I learned to remember names like Vince Evans, Brian Baschnagel and Bob Thomas are still burned in my brain (along with a guy named Walter Payton who turned out OK). And I learned to hate the Packers, Vikings and Lions too.

My point isn’t to take a trip down Memory Lane but to illustrate that just as there’s nothing like uncovering that emotional connection to your brand, there’s nothing like uncovering that emotional reason why they can’t stand your competitors (or if they don’t know your competitors, they can’t stand the attributes your competitors highlight most). Perhaps not every product or service can stir the senses as deeply as a sports team can, but don’t let that prevent you from talking to your prospective customers through polls, surveys, focus groups and 1-on-1 interviews to gather information. They have stories that are waiting to be brought out into the open and if you let them talk long enough and listen well, you’ll begin to hear the distinct reasons why they make the choices that they do. When a marketer can pick up on some of the most common and most powerful insights, they have a chance at capturing that emotion in the brand message.

And if that brand message is put in the right media that makes a person say, “yes, that brand gets me,” then you have a fighting chance at getting a sale, a long-term customer and a Fan.

Ah. There’s that beautiful word: Fan. We see it used enough in sporting arenas or on Facebook, but it has applications far beyond Soldier Field. We’re not just talking about customers here. The Fan is the person who can’t sing your praises enough to others and will buy your product or service regardless of the fact that it might be a little more expensive than the others. The Fan will defend you to others in a social setting (or a social media setting) because he believes in what you offer that much. It’s what causes Fans to pay ticket prices starting at $500 a seat. It’s what causes Fans to reach for one product on the shelf versus another too. So you surely don’t want to irritate the Fan or take them for granted. You want to design VIP loyalty programs around them, special password-only microsites around them, have frequent conversations with them in the social media realm and give every effort to show that you are clearly listening to them.

Know your Fans. Know your Enemies. Define the differences in a crystal-clear way in your brand strategy and don’t ever try to think you can be everything to everyone as you do.

What else? Oh yeah. One more thing: Go Bears.

Chicagoland companies planning to hire in 2011. Now’s the time for HR to get creative.

Good news from the Management Association of Illinois: A new survey says that 52% of Illinois companies plan to hire new workers in 2011 or bring back workers they laid off in 2010. Not only is this encouraging to hear but Illinois also beats the national average here as well.

This leads me to believe that this is a good opportunity for companies in Chicagoland about to hire to think beyond the basics of common benefits as they ready that classified ad or online job posting.

Don’t get me wrong, benefits are great and nobody should take them for granted in a day and age where our economic recovery still has a long way to go. Yet, just as you have to position your company’s brand to the right target audience, recognize the opportunity to position it here again above the other voices in the crowd who are hiring toward the right type of individual who will fit into your culture. In considering that one extra unusual perk that include in your benefits package, don’t choose it for its ability to get you some extra press. If it’s creative but isn’t really something that’s going to be utilized, there may not be much point in adding it to the mix.

Instead, choose the unusual perk because it is an accurate reflection what makes your company different. For example, I’ve run a company where preserving family time and the bonds that go with it were very important to me. I’m close to my family, my partner is close to his family and we’ve had people on staff who can’t imagine missing out on a child’s school play or field trip. We wouldn’t want them to. So my partner and I make sure that vacation days are not in short supply and the people who work for us get a terrific amount of days right off the bat. Let’s just say it’s more than the traditional 2 weeks most companies give when someone is hired (obviously they have to get their work done far enough in advance of that time off, but it’s definitely there).

Or let’s say yours is a company where the majority of the employees and managers have a very strong bond to their pets – they consider their pets to be members of the family, want to bring their pets to work (a perk in itself) and will basically spend any amount of money to ensure the well-being of their canines, felines, hamsters and assorted creatures. For this and other companies like it, offering pet insurance coverage might be a nice reflection on the company to show how they understand what’s important to most employees.

Some other unusual benefits I’ve come across, courtesy of Fortune Magazine’s 100 Best Companies to Work For:

  • Paid Sabbatical
  • Education Reimbursement
  • Same-Sex Partner Benefits
  • Unlimited Sick Days
  • Referral Bonuses
  • Even an On-Site Farmer’s Market!

I’m not suggesting you do all of these by any means. What I am suggesting is that few people ever started a conversation about a company over the fact that it offers health and dental insurance or a 401K (again, nice to have and important, but rather expected if it’s the typical plan). What I am also suggesting is to start with one perk or allow your people to have a hand in voting for the perk, provided you can swing it financially.

Company incentives can play a part here too.
As my friend Rob Jager of Hedgehog Consulting would suggest, you may want to consider how you can give performance incentives to unlock some of these perks so that they aren’t merely “given.” You have your base of benefits that people have typically heard of, but then you have that special perk or perks that is out there if company goals for the quarter/year are met.

I’m extremely optimistic about 2011 is going to bring for businesses – after what we’ve been through, why dwell on where we’ve been? – so if your company plans to follow the hiring trend that this recent survey says Illinois companies are in for, remember that employee recruitment can provide yet another way for your business to bolster its brand. And the right creative perks that reflect your culture just might fuel those conversations between job hunters on the bus or the El – because if you’ve ever been packed in on any of those commuter rides, you know that a conversation between two people is really a conversation among twenty.

If your company has a benefit or benefits that you feel sets it apart from the pack, I’d love to hear about it. Maybe we’ll post some of the best ones here too.

(Source: Chicago Sun-Times, January 11, 2011)