Hot Commodity

 I recently came across a very unique company, Despair Inc., which claims that since true motivation can only come from within, the multi-billion dollar indstury that thrives on the sale of motivational products and services is really a bunch of hot air. Motivational products create unrealistic expectations they say, which is how they justify their own “soul-crushing depressing” Demotivator designs.

While it’s doubtful that anyone would actually hang one of Despair Inc.’s posters on a wall in an office, they are pretty entertaining… and kind of grounding. Plus no one can deny that at a time like this, with our economy spiraling downward uncontrollably after yet another bubble, perhaps there is some truth to their views.

Among my favorites:

 So true! People that are physically attractive or people with attractive personalities always get away with so much more- even if their ideas aren’t very good or their reasoning isn’t very sound. I’d say this applies to companies as well. It seems that several sexy web2.0 startups with snazzy interfaces and striking homepages are somehow blinding people as to the fact that they have yet to develop a business model and/or revenue model…

Not sure I really have to explain this one right now…

And finally…

Too bad I like being opinionated too much to stop now. Besides, if I weren’t blogging you never would have known about Despair, Inc. in the first place!

SpinSpotter is a new startup that aims to scan news stories for signs of “spin”. Users can download “Spinoculars”, a toolbar located on their browser that lets them know if the story they are reading has any phrases or words that indicate bias. It highlights those words in red and allows users to click on them to find out exactly why SpinSpotter has flagged them.

The tool works in three ways, says founder Todd Herman. First, it uses an algorithm to discover phrases that violate any of the six transgressions that the company’s journalism advisory board came up with based on the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics. These are personal voice, passive voice, a biased source, disregarded context, selective disclosure and lack of balance. SpinSpotter’s algorithm also uses a database of common phrases that are used when spinning a story. Finally, readers themselves can flag instances of “spin”.

Currently, because SpinSpotter has started out with very few phrases in its database of spin, it rarely flags articles. “Referring to something as spin is a pretty serious thing. We don’t want to go through vandalizing properties. We would like to do this responsibly,” says Herman. Alright, so I understand that bias in the media and the news can be a problem, but do we really need a web tool to help us recognize this fact? If it only highlights writing that is flagrantly biased, can’t we just discern that ourselves? And if you can’t, you probably need more help than a simple web tool can provide.

As internet users become more and more dependent on blogs and news aggregators to get their daily news fix, it seems to me that we enjoy reading articles and posts that are written from an angle and that present a point of view. This doesn’t mean that we agree with the point of view, but rather that we like to understand the “so what?” in regards to any given topic. In fact, when I read several news stories I often find complete objectivity inappropriate and useless. Part of the beauty of information exchange is that we expect to be given some direction as to how to think about a subject by those that are experts or more knowledgeable about any given topic. We are then free to agree, disagree, debate, discuss, explore, etc.

Voice, tone, point of view- these are the components that make up the character of any piece of writing. These are the elements that making writing and expression such an art. Learning to separate opinions and bias from facts and figures is part of the academic journey. Additionally, the algorithm is especially limited because it can spot phrases but can’t account for context or tone. How can we rely on a rudimentary algorithm to inform us of “spin”? That sounds like indolence at its worst. Plus, who wants big red boxes all over the article being read. That sounds like more of a distraction than a help.

Finally, a philosophical concern: in choosing to highlight certain phrases and words, the application is itself being subjective. “I’m not a slave to objectivity. I’m never quite sure what it means. And it means different things to different people.” -Peter Jennings

That said, I guess there are some potential uses for SpinSpotter. Perhaps it could be employed as a teaching tool in English classes to help facilitate lessons on bias and point of view. Or maybe it could be used to help train newscasters who often have to report “this just in” news on the fly? Maybe.

I wonder what this post would look like if I viewed it through a pair of Spinoculars…

For several years now stores that cater to the more prosperous demographic have seemed “immune” to the ups and downs of the business cycle, but in today’s economy, as the real estate market and Wall Street are both struggling, it appears that even the upper class is trying to save, especially when it comes to “discretionary” purchases such as clothing, electronics, jewelry, home furnishings, etc. that they might usually splurge on at higher end department stores.

From the retailers’ perspective, everyone likes to advertise when times are good, but several companies seem to scale back heavily on marketing gimmicks and campaigns as soon as the economy turns a little sour, even though there are probably other areas of discretionary investments that could be (and should be) minimized instead. Finding ways to improve operations, decreasing overhead, and overall increased efficiency are all ways to cut costs, and can give a company an extra advantage when times are rough, especially when their customers might be trying to cut back.

As the fall season approaches, several of the nation’s higher-end retailers, anxious about the uncertain economic outlook, are weary of engaging in large advertising campaigns, but Bloomingdale’s (a division of Macy’s) and Saks Fifth Avenue (a unit of Saks) recognize the importance of continually appealing to and “wooing” customers, and are stressing “innovative advertising” as a means to attract customers even in an economic downturn (according to an article in the Times).

 “We’re in a tough economy; there’s no denying that,” says Jack Hruska, executive vice president for creative services at Bloomingdale’s in NY. He adds, though, that those retailers “who play up their strengths will emerge stronger when the economy comes back than those who retreat or scale back. We’ve seen that time and time again.” Clearly other retailers must have their eyes wide closed.

 Bloomingdale’s is introducing an elaborate campaign centered on music, and based on successful results of an experiment with a virtual catalog in the spring, Saks Fifth is expanding the availability of video clips online to offer shoppers a more comprehensive virtual version of their catalogs. They are also attempting to appeal to youthful shoppers that may be slightly younger than their typical customer base, via an outreach campaign to almost 100 blogs and a presence on social media websites like Facebook.

Frivolous advertising spend is obviously unacceptable whether or not the economy is down, but both companies are cognizant of the fact that for luxury goods there’s an expectation of better service and that they must be able to convey this level of service at all times in order to retain a loyal customer base. Thus, in times like this, they are astutely looking to drive outsized growth with “innovative initiatives” and looking for “ways that are nontraditional” to reach the hearts and minds of their customers.

I met Ron Klein (Chairman & CEO of Macy’s East) in this past February at the Undergraduate Business School Leadership Conference, and he shared with us several of their “work-in-progress” campaigns at the time. They were entertaining and appealing and I’m looking forward to the newest round, which were just released yesterday. Bravo!

I was pretty irritated a couple days ago when I walked to the Pottruck Center (Penn’s huge gym) only to find that it was closed for “renovations”, but then I went back today and discovered that they’ve installed brand new machines on every floor! The treadmills, ellipticals, bikes, etc. are all by the same brand as they were before (Life Fitness) but now have an entire media center built in. The interesting part is that the media center caters exclusively to iPod users- basically that’s the only kind of music player you can plug in. The machines have a fairly large touch screen where users can scroll through and select songs or play lists, adjust the volume, and perform all other music functions without ever having to touch their iPods. It’s an excellent idea on behalf of Life Fitness, and fantastic for Apple as well, because if you didn’t already have an iPod at Penn, you’ll certainly want one now. The exclusivity is just another sign of how the iPod and iPod related products have truly captured the market, especially among young adults.

Touch screen technology has been around for a while now, but this just goes to show how important incremental innovation is. Something as simple as enabling students to hook their music directly to the machines makes Penn look cooler, Life Fitness seem more inventive, and enforces Apple’s brand image immensely on this campus.

Too bad I can’t use “my iPod’s battery is dead” as an excuse not to go to the gym anymore.

French Pantry is supposedly one of those “gem” restaurants in Jacksonville, a tiny family run café hidden away on an unfamiliar road with no billboards or arrows to signal that a restaurant is what lies beneath the maroon awning that overlooks the building. I had heard that the food was heavenly though, so a group of friends and I decided to go there for lunch to celebrate someone’s birthday. We’re all vegetarian, so when the waiter brought out our first appetizer with bacon bits on top we were a little disappointed but figured it’d be no big deal to have it exchanged and were thankful that we had seen it right way. What follows is my first conversation with the waiter (after spending 15 minutes trying to get his attention): 

Waiter: What?

Me: Well we’re actually all vegetarian at this table and had asked that there be no bacon on this salad.

Waiter: Oh, well I didn’t make it.

Me: (staring speechless for a minute) Ummm yes I know but we’re vegetarian…

Waiter: (cuts me off) Well yea but what do you want me to do?

Me: (again incredulous) Uh well I was hoping you could maybe bring us a new one…

Waiter: So you want me to take this one back and exchange it?

Me: (Now I’m thinking “No you idiot we’d love to have this one sit here and just ogle at it in all its bacon-y glory”) Yes that would be greatly appreciated…

Waiter: (with attitude) Ok, fine but next time make sure you tell them you don’t want meat on it.

Me: Well we did, in fact I saw the woman at the front write it down…

Waiter: (leaves without listening)

Okay so things are not off to a great start but we begin eating the bruschetta and it’s pretty delicious so we start enjoying ourselves again. The new salad comes out a few minutes later, along with our other entrees, and we eagerly dig in. My friend takes a bite of the sandwich and, to our dismay, discovers that it has large chunks of chicken in it. At this point we’re all pretty upset so I try to grab the waiter’s attention again. 

Conversation with waiter part duex:

Me: Sorry, but this sandwich has chicken in it.

Waiter: (stares at me blankly)

Me: We’re vegetarian remember…

Waiter: Oh yea, well that’s not chicken it’s just uhh… well it’s a Panini….

Me: Yes it is a Panini but it has chicken on it…

Waiter: Uh well I don’t know I’ll go ask the people in the front.

Me: (“What exactly does he need to ask them?“) Um okay…

Waiter: (comes back nearly 5 minutes later) Can you take the plate up there and show them the chicken?

Alright so give us a break. We may be vegetarian but we certainly know what chicken looks like…

Me: Uhh okay I guess…

Long story short, we spend 15 minutes arguing with the people at the front and end up leaving without having eaten any sort of sandwich at all. 

The thing is that as a vegetarian I’ve had this experience several times. But when the waiter is at all apologetic, or the manager personally brings out a new dish for us, I tend to quickly forget about the problem at hand and end up remembering the great customer service instead of the meat. Based on the fact that we waited in line for 20 minutes I’m pretty sure that quickly bringing out a new sandwich without doubting our ability to tell what was and wasn’t on our plates would not have hurt their bottom line. Plus they would have spent less time on the situation and had a group of happy customers instead of fuming ones. At a place like this where they take a minimalist approach to marketing and advertising and instead rely on word of mouth and a small but loyal customer base, customer satisfaction is critical! 

It’s amazing that so many restaurants (and several other companies that interact with consumers) can whip up all sorts of fancy desserts and delights but can’t figure out a simple recipe for customer satisfaction/experience. I think part of the problem, however, (drum roll please) is that companies confuse premium customer services with good customer experience and customer satisfaction. 

Let me explain. Just because Lexus offers to drive out to your house, pick up your car, and drop off a rental vehicle for you to use while they change your oil and take care of some maintenance issues does not mean that they provide a great customer experience. If the sales representative or employee that drives to your house is rude, irritable, or simply not very friendly, you will probably forget that he/she drove all the way to your house to perform this premium service and instead fixate on how unpleasant the experience was. Granted, companies that offer premium services often have very well trained personnel that are experts when it comes to customer satisfaction, but what that doesn’t mean is that you need to offer premium services to also provide a great customer experience. Perhaps this is a bit cliché, but after a recent firsthand experience I feel justified in saying that a smile, a good attitude, and an aggressive attempt to satiate small customer requests can go a long way in retaining a loyal customer base and in developing a competitive advantage over other, perhaps larger, competitors. Companies should take a minute to recognize this difference and first establish rules, policies, and practices around customer satisfaction and a memorable customer experience before getting their hands dirty with premium services, fancy foods, and other unique (sometimes unnecessary) measures. 

A fellow Penn student is in Jacksonville for an internship and asked for restaurant suggestions. Despite the great food, French Pantry will not be on the list I give him.

Today I ate a yellow watermelon. When I closed my eyes, it tasted perfectly normal. When I opened them though, I couldn’t help but expect each bite to taste like pineapple or some other citrusy fruit.

Some changes companies make are advantageous because they are symbolic, more efficient, or an important marketing ploy.

Wal*Mart… oops I mean Walmart*… changed its logo to signify changes in the company’s policies and customer service and a revamping of the company and its reputation. I’m not saying that a simple logo change will help them accomplish all this, but I understand where they are coming from.

When Zephyrhills and Poland Springs changed the shape of their bottles it was not only more eco-friendly but also allowed them to showcase their new eco-friendly focuses. Plastic water bottles, in general, are the most anti-eco-friendly invention ever, but that’s a whole different story. Again, the change makes sense from their perspective.

When Head & Shoulders overhauled their shampoo bottles to emphasize their change from a functional consumer product to a “desirable beauty brand” the sleek new curved bottle shapes were important from a consumer awareness point of view.

When Heinz decided to sell green and purple ketchup, however, the change was unwarranted.

There was just something weird about putting green goo on my French fries (as opposed to red goo), and it seems like others felt the same way because the green and purple bottles were off the grocery store shelves as quickly as they had gotten on. This change was completely unnecessary- change for change’s sake it seems. The taste was the same, but red ketchup is a successful staple and there was no reason to tinker with that. Mass idea generation is great, but these ideas then have to be assessed from all angles before spending time and resources on them because unfortunately, all ideas are not created equal. For example, the idea to find a way to grow yellow pineapples watermelons should never have been supported.

Friday was my last day as a summer intern at Brilliont. The nine weeks I was here absolutely flew by, and I learned more and had more fun than I had thought possible. I’ll get into this more in a later post though, because right now it just makes me sad to be done… don’t worry though, I’ll still be blogging! But speaking of flying, I caught a flight back home to Jacksonville from Philly on Saturday and made an interesting observation about Southwest…

I “LUV” Southwest Airlines because they “LUV” the Philadelphia to Jacksonville and Jacksonville to Philadelphia routes. This works out perfectly since I go to school in Philly (Penn) and live in Jax. And because of their awesome deals on Ding! I probably spend as much on flights during the entire year as some of my friends spend to fly home on Thanksgiving. Southwest is a unique company in several ways, and one of the few remaining airlines that allows you to check in 2 bags for free. What’s more wonderful is the fact that they still hand out free drinks and snacks even if it’s a short local flight! My favorite part, however, used to be the fact that there was no assigned seating. No annoying air hostesses trying to direct you to your seat even though you know that 12D probably is right behind 11D, no stupid boarding pass forcing you to squeeze in between two screaming children, no hassle of trying to find someone to switch seats with because the rest of your family is on the other end of the plane. The system was first come first serve, which worked in favor of both the customers and the airlines because it rewarded and encouraged passengers to get to the gate just a little early.

Now, however, it seems Southwest has gotten so caught up in the “open seating” idea that they have forgotten some basics. Like the old method, the newest boarding method assigns each person a letter (A, B, C) representing their boarding group. Unlike the old method, however, the new method also assigns each person a number that represents their exact position within their boarding group. This means that even if someone with the letter/number combination A34 has been at the gate (or worse, in line) for 20 minutes, a person with the letter/number combination A33 can mosey on over and slip in front whenever he/she feels like it. This process not only eliminates any incentive to arrive early (or even on time), but also breeds irritation among passengers that are often already on edge after a packing, travel, or stress filled day. Not that I like getting to the airport early, but I do hate when a flight departs late because passengers are running late. And admit it, if you’ve been at the gate for 20 minutes now and someone walks up at the last minute and cuts in front of you just because their ticket has a lower number than yours, you’d be annoyed too. Southwest claims it is more efficient and innovative (whatever that means these days), but most people just seemed annoyed or confused, and I’d say the boarding process was a lot more chaotic and took much longer than in the past.

While there is no direct connection (pun intended), this reminds me of companies that make electronic gadgets and devices so complex that while they have wonderful technological capabilities, users just find them overwhelming. This isn’t exactly the same thing, but it’s along the same lines. A focus on “innovation” is critical, but a quick reality check with regards to human nature, customers, and simply whether or not the decision/method is achieving its end goal is kind of important too, and I think Southwest has missed the boat (or perhaps flight) on this one.

I’ve mentioned several times that I’ve been researching innovative companies from around the world for a project at Brilliont. Several of these companies can be characterized as belonging to the “social web” category, but few companies that are in this category, in my opinion, are truly innovative. I’ve written previously about The Point, a community website that helps people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen. This, I believe is a novel idea. The majority of the companies I read about, however, are social networking sites, which despite their best efforts, are simply not innovative. Most of these websites fall into one of three categories, each as unappealing as the one before.

The first is the “copycat” category. A few days ago I came across an “in pictures” list on Forbes of “Facebook Copycats Abroad” that details a few of the several hundred Facebook clones around the world. I’m not sure how you can call yourself “innovative” for starting the 8 millionth “social networking” website and basing both the aesthetics and the functionality entirely off a website that already exists. Although I must admit that I am quite a fan of Hatebook, an anti-social utility that disconnects you from the things YOU HATE. Its tag line reminds us that “the enemies of [our] enemies are [our] friends” and encourages us to find them on Hatebook.

The next bunch fall in the “niche but totally outrageous” category. My boss recently told me about a social networking website for women that like ex-convicts. Hilarious? Yes. Creepy? Definitely. Innovative? I don’t think so. Then there’s Petster, a social network where you, the human with typing abilities, can make a profile for your pet and share with others every detail of your pet’s existence. And if this is too vague or broad for you, I’m sure either Dogster, Catster, or Hamsterster will suit your fancy. You thought I was kidding about that last one right? Nope, check out the link. I’m sure ferretster.com is coming soon. I could go on for years, but I think you get the point.

Finally, we have the “let’s get every single human being under the sun to join because quantity is so much better than quality” category. Yesterday my boss sent me a link to myyearbook.com, a social network started by two high school students because “friendster gets boring, myspace is creepy, and classmates is a rip off”. So what makes myyearbook.com so different from these other social networks? Nothing. The founders want myyearbook.com to “be the only community of people worth going to. It would have every high school, every college, every graduate school, every summer program, every employer, everyone.” Let’s go back to basic principles. You cannot be everything to everyone (unless you are Google), and if you try then you will fail (again, unless you are Google). The only thing that I think makes any social network at all unique or useful is exclusivity, and this website has clearly thrown that to the wind. Even Facebook, the one social network that I am a member of (I joined because it was exclusively for college students), has lost much of its appeal by opening its doors to anyone and everyone with an email address.

I’m waiting for the day when the founders of any one of these social networks are able to truly monetize their website. Meanwhile, I’ll enjoy reading about the ridiculous ideas people keep coming up with. Better yet, maybe I’ll even start my own social networking site.

The Point is a community website for organizing group actions. They basically help people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen. Campaigns (group actions) on The Point are all based on the “tipping point” model (great book by the way) where participants take action to solve their problem, but only once a critical mass of people have committed such that the combined force will “tip” the issue. This makes it different from typical fundraising campaigns because no one has to act until it is confirmed that enough people are committed to make a difference. Campaigns range from minor issues like “Facebook must allow users to choose the color of their profile or else we will all send messages to their PR staff if 50,000 people join this campaigns” to movements to rebuild community parks, raise funding to produce a musical, boycott an oil company once enough people join to force them to reduce profits, and even move the Super Bowl from Sunday to Saturday (that’s just crazy).

The concept behind The Point is really interesting in and of itself but the website is also very well designed and has several neat functions. One such feature allows you to set your relationship to the “target” of the campaign; for example, if you were trying to get AT&T to do something you might set your relationship as “customer” and then other AT&T customers would be notified of your campaign. Continuing with the “network” theme that the tipping point implies, they also have a “6-degrees” type of “supply chain” feature that maps the relationship between different companies. So say that company X sells to paper mill Y which sells to consumer-accessible stationery store Z. You can tell The Point which companies you interact with directly, and they’ll tell you all the ones you’re supporting indirectly.

Andrew Mason (the founder) is quite the visionary. He believes that when effectively aggregated the consumer’s purchasing power is ultimate power. In the long run he figures The Point could be a tool for individuals to, in effect, regulate corporate policy by wielding their pocketbooks. No need for government. “This is true democracy- this is what America’s all about! And the efficiency of the process, I think, is a win for individuals and companies alike,” he says.

The website just launched in late 2007 so it’s going to be a while before we know how effective it is, but I really like the concept. They will, of course, have to be responsible for quite a bit of content moderation as I’m sure there will be people who try to start inappropriate campaigns like “I’ll run around the block naked if 5 people give me $1” or threatening ones like “I’ll put a bomb in the White House if 20 people agree to help me” (hopefully writing that doesn’t get me in trouble). People may also have difficulties in structuring campaigns that address the issue or problem they really want to attack (see On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B).

Overall though it’s a great example of the overarching theme of how the internet is enabling people to connect without the need of a “middle man” or “moderator”, a role that I see as quickly going extinct in several different spaces. But more on that another time- for now, I’ve made my point.

In response to the recent scramble between Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google, several experts have been examining the future of the online search domain, and in the last few weeks I’ve come across several articles that state that the “Big Three” are actually fighting over the “scraps of the last decade of innovation” when in fact a new movement may change the way people use the Internet to search altogether. Of course, this sounds ridiculous when you look at the success of a company like Google that has developed a very rapid and highly efficient method for handling and making sense of the vastest collection of data we humans have ever compiled. As the Web grows exponentially larger and larger, it would seem that search would become increasingly important as well. If you think about it though, as the Web grows larger and larger it will also become more difficult to search efficiently and meaningfully in a way that will deliver useful search results.

So, with the rise of social networking websites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Second Life, LinkedIn, and Orkut, the youngest generation of Internet users might find themselves searching via their various social networks instead of a complicated (but still generic) search algorithm. Thus, Delver and several other startups are now attacking the concept of “Social Search”, a more refined version of basic Internet search that helps streamline your results based on the argument (or hope) that people you interact with through various social networks should know you better than a mathematical equation. Even Udi Manber, Google’s VP of Engineering in charge of search quality, has suggested that Google’s search could naturally evolve to embrace the data produced from these sites. “Search has always been about people. It’s about getting people what they need. The art of ranking is one of taking lots of signals and putting them together. Signals from your friends are better, stronger, signals,” he says.

(picture courtesy of PopularMechanics)

 Beyond just the social networks you join, think about the amount of information you voluntarily (sort of) provide to Netflix, Amazon, iTunes and several other popular online vendors. Currently a lot of this information is stored in different places (ie: your browser history, your Facebook or MySpace page, the Netflix or iTunes server, etc) but imagine if this mass of information could be used to influence search results on a regular basis. It is already done on a small scale by several of the applications and websites I’ve mentioned but nobody “owns” social search in general the way Google “owns” search (though it is very conceivable that Google may just evolve to own social search as well).

I think it is only natural that a more informed search “algorithm” evolve but I do see some potential concerns.

• Sometimes I like the “more random” results that Google generates. There have been times when I was looking for a website that I had visited before or that had been recommended by a friend who swore by it and ended up finding something else- something better. If “Social Search” eliminates these from the results (or moves them to the very end) we may find ourselves narrowing the search domain further than we want.
• How would organic versus non organic search work? Would websites/companies that pay to appear first or on the sponsored links tabs be subject to this informed search as well?
• When I’m talking to someone remotely and I want to find something they’ll often tell me key words to search for and then say something like “it’s the 5^th one down.” If search becomes more customized the search result order may differ drastically.
• There will of course be all kinds of privacy and security issues that crop up as this phenomenon emerges. I won’t even get into that here.

Some of these are minor issues that are probably worth enduring for the sake of a very efficient and “custom” social search and others will probably be addressed as the search evolves. I wonder what kind of effect this would have on social networks and vendors such as Amazon, Netflix, etc. and what kind of revenue opportunities may emerge?