It’s been a while since my last post. Too long. It’s not for lack of content. Believe me, I’ve had plenty on my mind, that’s worth sharing. A few things happened that brought my writing to a screeching halt:
I’ve been swamped at the office working on some very exciting new projects
I broke my hand which makes typing challenging at best
I’ve been doing a lot more travel than normal and using the flight time to catch up on sleep
I spent the last week in Florida with the kids at Disney World
Excuses, I know, we all have them. So with all that said, rather than write an ungodly amount of posts, I’m opting to condense all my ramblings into 3 posts with 5 focus areas. This is the first.
We launched 4 the first ever Walgreens Photo Blog, titled “Walgreens Snaps.” I got the privilege of crafting the first post. I’m excited about this blog because it’s content that our community wants and it’s going to drive serious SEO performance for our Photo Site.
Like many early adopter brands, we launched our official Walgreens Google+ page. We’re still figuring out how we’ll use Google+, but I can tell you that Hangouts will be a major part of how we find success on Google+.
“First To Know” launched on our Walgreens Facebook page. First to know is about rewarding our most plugged in community members. By signing up for first to know, Facebook community members will be alerted to great deals, special offers and more, before ANYONE else learns about it. The response has been great since launching 2 weeks ago.
Our Walgreens Social Media team won a Chicago Interactive Marketing Association award for our Flu Check-In program. While I’m not an award junky like Creative Directors at Leo Burnett, I think awards are a great sense of validation for the ideas we’re bringing to market. Part of our KPIs this year are 5 projects that meet the Return On Amazing criteria…with 3 of them needing to win awards. This helps keep the bar high and all of us focused on big ideas that drive the organization.
Our Social Media team started as a team of 1 and now we’re a team of 7 with 2 more hires to go. Sam Ogborn and Eric Gottloeb are our 2 newest hires. Both bring great experience…REAL experience, as opposed to “consultative” experience that’s focused on theory. To go from 1 to 7 inside of 7 months…and eventually 9, definitely shows you how important social is to our organization.
This video from The Jimmy Fallon Show does a great job of explaining the mass hysteria around Google+:
It’s funny, but Seth Green is spot on. Others, more qualified than I, have already ripped the invite policy, so I won’t go there. We also have a large group of misguided people who are proclaiming Google+ a Facebook killer or a twitter killer or a something else killer. To those pundits, I say, you are missing the point.
I resisted the urge to publish a post on Google+ right after it came out, unlike many others. When I first joined there just wasn’t enough people using it to get a fair read. To be honest with you, there still isn’t enough people, or maybe a better way to say it, is enough of the right people using it to make a fair evaluation. With that in mind here’s 5 thoughts I have:
Google+ gets a lot right. As I wrote on Google+, “Circles seem like the key. The ability to segment your entire circle of connections into sub-circles is a game changer and honestly, aligned better with user behavior. We don’t want to share the same way with a long-time friend, co-worker, former colleague or family member.” That’s really the killer function and it shows that Google truly understands user behavior. But, it’s also something that Facebook could very easily replicate. So how long will it really be a point of differentiation?
The integration of Google+ into all other Google products (gmail, calendar, etc.) was the smartest decision they made. Instead of Google+ becoming a separate destination it can now act as something that ties across all the Google products you’re already using. Facebook can’t even start to compete here.
The lack of a mobile app for the iPhone and Blackberry (yes, I know the Blackberry is dying a slow death) is hurting the ability for Google+ to scale. With more than 40% of Facebook users using Facebook via mobile devices and similar behavior (mobile, mobile, mobile) for other social networks, Google wasn’t thinking forward enough here. As a sample size of 1 I can tell you my Google+ usage is nowhere near as high as it would be if I could be connected to it on the go. Big miss here that I know they’ll correct, but it needs to be said. The success of failure of Google+ will be tied directly to how strong and simple the mobile experience is.
Google+ isn’t a replacement for twitter or Facebook. But, it is something that will redirect and shift where we spend our time. That’s why #2 is so important. We already search for things, email, watch videos on youTube, scheduled events, etc. With Google+ being integrated across all Google products, Google has found a way for us to “multi-task” with Google+ while we’re doing something else powered by Google. Time is finite, the integration approach is one way to gain more of it. What else will they do to keep us plugged in?
This is the most important thought, what problem does Google+ solve? I still don’t know. Sure, it’s nice. It’s simple. It has great features like Circles and Huddle. But, if you are already on Facebook, if you are already on twitter, if you don’t social network at all, what does Google+ provide that makes your life better, simpler, easier, more enjoyable, etc.? The best products, the best ideas, the best platforms…the ones that succeed, SOLVE a problem. What does Google+ solve?
I’m looking forward to using Google+ more and more, especially through the iPhone and iPad apps once they are in market. After that, I’ll have a more in depth post covering what I think the value of Google+ is for users and marketers.
I love Legos. I think I love them more as an adult than I did as a child. In fact, there’s really only one major Lego initiative I can remember undertaking as a kid. My dad and I, over the course of about a month, built Disney’s Magic Castle. It was hundreds of pieces. I wish I had a picture; I looked all over Google for it, but couldn’t find anything. Bummer, because it was impressive.
My son, John, loves Legos. Love might even be an understatement, because Legos seem to be a passion for him. This past weekend, John and attended the Lego KidsFest in Minneapolis. It was a blast. Just awesome. John was tentative at first. I think the scale of the event was just daunting for him. But, he quickly warmed up and got to work with building towers, buildings and cars that could be raced down ramps.
I mostly sat back and just watched him dream up idea after our idea. There’s something cool, raw, interesting and exciting about watching a child create something. There are no rules, no boundaries, no need to be uniform. It’s all wide open. It’s pure creativity, just like how it should be all the time for everyone.
Can you pay people to change? Can you purchase compliance? Is social success predicated on company culture? Do people really want to be social? Are the social “gurus” (laughable) right in how the lofty and esoterica language they use to describe social? All of these questions and more are up for grabs with Google’s decision to tie employee bonuses to the succes of failure of their forays into the social space.
Last week, Larry Page, Google’s CEO sent out a company wide memo that outlined the importance of social, the role employees must play in driving social success and how their compensation will be tied to Google’s growth in social. If you will, Google is trying to buy employee participation, adoption, interest and promotion of social.
Ballsy, for sure. It certainly sends a signal that Google has flopped thus far in social and doesn’t want it to happen again. I’m not exaggerating when I say failure. Take for example the following: Knoll wasn’t a hit. Orkut fell on deaf ears. Jaiku was just bad. Wave was a failure. Blogger is nice, but is no WordPress. Buzz didn’t take off.
Over and over Google has flopped in the social space for one reason or another. Will this brave approach by Larry Page be the lightening rod that unifies the organization or will it cause irreparable harm because people will be faking their participation?
Time will tell. But, one thing is for sure, this is the ultimate social experiment.
I’ve watched this Super Bowl ad from Google more times than I can count. I remember watching it live during the Super Bowl, in Vegas, and being stunned at the simplicity of the spot. It connects with us, because we’ve all started our journey toward something bigger at the altar of Google.
Last week Kevin Willer of Google, shared that this spot was not created for the Super Bowl. Google had created several “Search Stories” videos and simply picked the best performing spot to run. Brilliant, when you consider most companies invest several million dollars into a new commercial that they are hoping will perform.
The Search Stories program is pretty cool. You can literally create your own story using a slick and simple to use tool. This past summer I used the tool to create one hell of a search story. With the holiday season upon us, I urge you to let your inner geek shine and try creating your own for someone special!
The interactive experience most often starts with Google. For years Google has been the dominant search engine leader, besting competitors like Microsoft, Yahoo!, Ask, AOL and others. Even when consumers know where they want to go or know exactly what they want, they turn to Google or another search engine and type in what they’re looking for.
Search engines, by default, exist to aggregate content across the web and provide website users relevant content to explore. Years ago, the content search engines aggregated were just links to other sites. Slowly, over time, search engines broadened the type of content they’d aggregate to include photos, videos, PDFs, and even music.
Over the last few years we’ve seen companies employ different approaches to return faster –and in theory – better search results. The most popular approach is called “predictive search” and was made famous by Apple via its iTunes product. When a user starts to type “Bob” into the iTunes search engine, Apple makes an assumption that the user is looking for “Bob Dylan” amongst other popular results. And, it was only this time last year that Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! announced that they would be pulling real-time streams from sites like twitter, directly into the search results page.
Google describes Google Instant as follows:
Google Instant is a new search enhancement that shows results as you type. We are pushing the limits of our technology and infrastructure to help you get better search results, faster. Our key technical insight was that people type slowly, but read quickly, typically taking 300 milliseconds between keystrokes, but only 30 milliseconds (a tenth of the time!) to glance at another part of the page. This means that you can scan a results page while you type.
The most obvious change is that you get to the right content much faster than before because you don’t have to finish typing your full search term, or even press “search.” Another shift is that seeing results as you type helps you formulate a better search term by providing instant feedback. You can now adapt your search on the fly until the results match exactly what you want. In time, we may wonder how search ever worked in any other way.
With “Instant” or “Real Time” search, users will see search results appear quicker and without having to hit the enter button. The key here is that the search results will update in real time as the user is typing their query. Here’s an example of what happens I type in the letter “a.”
You can see that the letter “a” is highlighted in black font. That’s the only letter I typed in. Google then does 3 things:
It predicts my query by offering me “amazon,” “aol,” “American airlines,” and “att” as options.
It returns results in the middle of the page for “Amazon” since that’s the most relevant search term
It returns paid search ads in the right hand column based on the search term “Amazon”
It’s taken me some time to understand what Google Instant and the similar offerings from its competitors mean for marketers. Users, ultimately, don’t care how search engines work, they simply assume that the search engines are doing “their job” by returning relevant search results. This is a major shift, not just in how search engines work, but in how users will interact with them.
Implications And Recommendations
After a significant amount of research, consultation with leading search engine experts and exchanges with Googlers, I feel comfortable outlining the following implications and recommendations:
If you’re currently neglecting search engine optimization; it’s time to get refocused. Whereas before you could trade SEO for paid search as a means to drive traffic, you’re going to find that SEO just became as important as paid search.
The time and dollar investment for SEO will increase because SEO will move from a casual marketing tool that a serious one. The shift from casual to serious means SEO could be happening on a daily and weekly basis (just like paid search programs) instead of a quarterly and semi-annual time-table.
The concept of being on the 1st page or “above the scroll” has changed. “As you continue typing and narrowing your search, the instantly changing and refreshing results below the search box will be giving you more relevant results. So if you previously looked on the second page, now those same results come to the top of the pile for you.” – Johanna Wright, director of product management for Google Insight (via AdAge).
Websites will need to be updated more frequently with fresher content. Fresher content tells search engines that a site is current and active. With search engines prioritizing newer content over older content, even if the newer content is less accurate, the need to denote your site as one that’s fresh is critical.
Greater emphasis needs to be paid to all Meta Tags. This includes Title, Keyword and Description tags. Meta Tags are the lifeblood of successful SEO initiatives because Google and the competition pay special attention to Meta Tags when determining the relevancy and accuracy of a site.
Keywords for content will need to become more varied because users won’t need to completely type in a term to see their search engine results. Tools like Google Keyword Suggestion should become part of a marketer’s overall web strategy toolbox.
Your social marketing efforts just became even more critical. Social equals fresh content to search engines. Social also generates a massive amount of links to your content and links are a major component of driving search engine visibility and relevancy.
Bottom line, what was old is now new again. All the building blocks of search engine optimization became significantly more important. SEO for years has often been a neglected area of focus for marketers because of the real-time results of paid search and the complexity of understanding the math behind making SEO work. It’s time to make SEO a key focus of your interactive marketing strategy.
These changes represent massive opportunity for outflanking your competition. Many companies will be slow to change and embrace these new changes. This leaves the door wide open for your organization to get ahead of them
For more information about Google Instant Search, please watch this short video from Google:
and this entertaining video:
showing how Bob Dylan’s song “Subterranean Homesick Blues” comes to life with Google Instant.
Yesterday the tech world was all a flutter about the agreement reached between Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Pixar and The Department Of Justice. That’s a lot of headliners, huh? So what was the agreement? Well, it was more of an abolishing of an existing agreement.
For years, the afore mentioned companies had a secret handshake agreement, that was more like an iron-clad agreement, that prevented each of the companies from trying to poach talent away from one of the other companies. Essentially, this was a – you don’t go after our guys and we won’t go after your guys agreement. The DOJ had a problem with it because it violates anti-trust laws. Rather than face charges, these companies agreed to eliminate their official and/or unofficial anti-poaching agreements.
My first thought was, wow, I can’t believe that companies this big, desirable and profitable have to put in place agreements like this. Look, I understand why they thought they needed to. The tech sector is always on the lookout for high quality talent and generally that high quality talent is limited. In essence, there are very few super stars out there. So when you get one, you certainly don’t want your competition trying to lure them away.
This is perplexing though because companies like this should simply be investing in their super star employees to make sure that even if a more than fair offer was presented to them, they still wouldn’t entertain it. Does that sound idealistic? It’s a sad fact that it does sound idealistic. But, in reality that’s how it should work. How many times have we heard that it’s easier and cheaper to retain clients/customer than it is to attract new ones? Well, I can tell you it’s been beaten into my head for more than a decade. Guess what? The same holds true for employees. It’s easier and cheaper to retain them, than it is to recruit new ones.
As someone who gets about 2 calls and 5 – 7 emails a week from recruiters and competitors I can tell you that investing in what you value pays off. My agency has invested in my growth since day 1. They’ve created an environment where I can learn, be challenged and thrive. In the 18 months I’ve been here, I’ve yet to voluntarily look for another job, nor have I listend in earnest to anything a recruiter/competitor has had to say. I simply enjoy what I get to do and who I do it for…why? Because, I’m valued. Value of course isn’t just money. It’s so much more than that.
Anti-poaching agreements don’t retain employees. Investing in them does. Incidentally, this same loyalty paradigm holds true for relationships. No prenuptial agreement, marriage license or document keeps someone loyal to another person. Investing in the other person, because you value them, does keep them loyal.
I’m just blown away that companies that big, with such smart people, believe that paperwork, contracts, handshake agreements and formal constraints would keep someone loyal and stop them from entertaining other options. Invest in what you value…everything else will take care of itself.
Unique Visitors. Time Spent On Site. Repeat Visitors. Bounce Rates. These metrics and so many more and quickly becoming less a means of determining how well your site is performing. Unique Visitors was supposed to tell us about the reach we were generating, while things like Time Spent on Site and Repeat Visitors was all about “engagement.” And of course, the Bounce Rate told us how appealing our site was; if you will it spoke of “interest” to the visitor.
So the formula and approach for measuring success was simple. We run a bunch of TV, print and outdoor that has a URL in it. Of course that URL is written in minuscule font and only up for 1/2 a second during the spot, but I digress. All these people see this URL and of course say, hey, I’ve been itching to visit a site about erectile dysfunction, so they type it in and come to the site. After all this is a sequential process, right? I mean we’ve only seen the path to purchase funnel a billion times over our careers. And then after you visit the site, you’re of course going to spend gobs and gobs of time getting all the information you need. Then, even though you have all this information you’ll of course want to come back multiple times to read all this information again and again.
Perhaps, my favorite misconception is that more time spent on site is better than less. I’ve seen situation after situation where the reason time spent on site is so high is because the site is to difficult to navigate that you can’t find what you’re looking for. I think you’re starting to see the lunacy of this model.
Today, though, the means for how we evaluate the performance of a site are even less relevant because simply put, people just don’t want to spend on your website. They’d rather hang out on youTube, Facebook, etc. This is why brands are rushing to build real estate on those sites. So great, you’ve built a Facebook Business/Fan page. You have 100s of thousands of followers who spending time “engaging” with your brand on Facebook. Well, doesn’t it reason that if they’re spending time with you there, it’s coming at the expense of spending time on your website? So, why is it so difficult to wrap our heads around the idea that previously key metrics, like Unique Visitors, should be decreasing?
Despite the obvious reasons why these data points are less important, we still rely on them to tell a story. Why? Simple, because those are the numbers being used internally by brand managers (and the like) to indicate their success to their superiors. The same KPI report being used today, is the one that was used last year, the year before that and 5 years ago. Internally, people have been conditioned to evaluate performance a certain way and it’s too difficult, daunting, challenging, time consuming, etc. to get them to change.
However, change, they must. And it’s our duty to help them change. If you don’t take it upon yourself to help guide the conversation and evolve how performance is being measured, you just might find yourself getting fired for not meeting a goal that’s impossible to meet.
Global Head of Digital Marketing & Social Media at Campbell Soup Co. Running a marathon at a sprinter's pace. Love ironing and my
kids, but not necessarily in that order. I'm always up for a spirited conversation. These are my thoughts and ramblings, not those of my employer. Learn More »
Global Head of Digital Marketing & Social Media at Campbell Soup Co. Running a marathon at a sprinter's pace. Love ironing and my
