I'm a Creative and Marketing Director Who Designs Effective Client Engagement
Design // Marketing // Strategy // SEO // PPC // Copywriting

From the Blog

The benefits of increases in search engine rankings can’t be summarized by a simple linear relationship. In finance, if you go from $9m in revenues to $12m in revenues, you have a simple 33% increase in revenues. If you move from the #11 spot (first page) in Google to the #10 spot (first page) you can expect a 143% increase in traffic! If you move from the #2 spot to the #1 spot you can expect your traffic to double.

This great article by Todd Jensen explains how 2nd page is 1st loser.

The takeaway: investments in SEO that result in improved rankings will have an effect more akin to a power curve on traffic than a simple linear effect!

“Cash is King.”

For small businesses, the ability to exploit emerging opportunities, respond to market pressues, and make strategic investments in the future all depend on access to cash. As a healthy heart is the result of eating right and working out, possessing a healthy cash flow is the result of consistent, effective investments in marketing.

Though startups are especially prone to wave-like fluctuations in cash flow, it is an issue every business must address. When the iron is hot and production people are stretched to meet demand, it is natural to pull back on marketing and lead generation. However, your current workload is due to the proposals and invoices you sent out in a previous cycle, and you will be bored and broke in the next cycle if you let off.

So how can you combat this?

  • Cycle Length: figure out how long your cycle is, from the moment a lead comes in until a project is completed and paid for (service company) or product is sold (product company).
  • Lead Value: Look at the last 6 to 12 months and add up all the leads you received. Calculate the final sales value of those leads (minus abandoned projects, discounts, and so forth). Divide the number of leads by the final sales value and you have a rough value for each lead. If you need to make $50k a month to stay afloat, and each lead is worth $500, you need to generate 100 leads a month!

At Blue Riot Labs, I’ve spent the day compiling data for how our online marketing efforts are working for our clients, and for us. I formulated a data-driven, five part online marketing strategy we have implemented for our clients and ourselves:

  1. Search engine optimization
  2. Pay-per-click
  3. Content creation
  4. Newsletter
  5. Social media

The results are pretty remarkable, here’s a small sampling:

Engineering and Manufacturing Company (1 month in)

  • Lowered CPC 24%, while simultaneously raising the Click Through Rate 1200% (yes, 1200%)
  • Gained hundreds of positions, with 22 keywords in the top 30 of Google and rising

National Advocacy Non-Profit (2 months in)

  • 43 keywords identified in Google’s Top 10, up from 31 just 17 days ago
  • 27% increase in traffic from search engines like Google, 16% increase in overall visits from all sources, 19% increase in unique visitors

Blue Riot Labs

  • 46 targeted keywords now ranking in the top 20 of Google
  • 14 positions gained for our top 5 targeted keywords in just the last week

Search engine optimization works, the data speaks for itself. Find out more about BRL’s SEO/PPC services.

Profits are to business as breathing is to life. Breathing is essential to life, but is not the purpose for living. Similarly, profits are essential for the existence of the corporation, but they are not the reason for its existence.
Dennis Bakke, founder of AES

Profits are a byproduct, like happiness. Those who pursue happiness at their sole end find themselves lacking it. Those who have purpose, clarity, and discipline reap happiness in full measure. So it is with profits.

As prepared for IT Strategies, University of Denver PMBA. References John Gallaugher’s “Information Systems: A Manager’s Guide to Harnessing Technology:”

“Often Imitated. Never Duplicated.” Whoever it was that first uttered this famous marketing adage, it is certainly appropriate as a descriptor of Facebook. The darling of Web 2.0, its meteoric rise has seen it hit milestones that seemed simply impossible five years ago

  • Microsoft (yes Microsoft) paid $240m for a 1.6% stake, which can imply Microsoft valued Facebook at 15 billion dollars
  • Facebook overtook MySpace in 2008 as the largest social network in the world

But despite these heady numbers, we have to ask: is Facebook worth it?

The Issue At Hand

The reach of Facebook into the daily lives of people around the globe is analogous to religion or politics. Indeed, Facebook has played a leading role in the uprisings spreading across the Mideast. Facebook Connect and social plugins now often replace the discussion area on websites. Facebook is used as the login verification system for a variety of websites like LivinSocial.com. As Gallaugher points out, Facebook is enveloping the web and other business models.

However it is Facebook’s business model that is the “issue at hand.” Google’s remarkable stock price increase over the last few years has reflected what its financial statements have consistently shown: its paid advertising is a cash cow. When people visit Google and search for “clearance hiking boots,” advertisers have made the resulting ads their “store windows” for Keen and Timberland boots.

Facebook’s strength is in its social reach. However, Facebook’s own research indicates “an average Facebook user with 500 friends actively follows the news on only forty of them, communicates with twenty, and keeps in close touch with about ten.” So when a user indicates a like for hiking, are they necessarily indicating a need for hiking boots, or will the ads simply seem annoying? When their friend shares pictures from their great vacation to Mexico, the readiness of their friends to make a similar purchase is not necessarily implied.

Can Facebook profit from the gargantuan amount of consumer data it has without creating a privacy debacle (as they have before) that creates a mass exodus? Can it create dependable revenue streams with its partners and advertisers? Or from a Profit and Loss standpoint, is Facebook all bark and no bite?

Potential Solutions

At the heart of Facebook is what Mark Zuckerberg calls the “Social Graph.” Like it sounds, it is the global mapping of users, organizations, and how they are connected. All potential solutions for Facebook come back to leveraging this social graph, and the reach it has into how people connect with one another.

  1. Paid Business Profiles: having a business profile on Facebook is becoming commonplace, like the Yellow Pages of today. By charging a nominal fee (say free for 6 months, then $19 a year), Facebook could raise significant capital. They would risk losing market share to Twitter, which already may have the advantage for businesses seeking to reach potential customers.
  2. Ecommerce: Some businesses are already providing purchasing opportunities through Facebook, but providing a feature-rich, secure ecommerce platform through Facebook has significant market opportunities. For established businesses it allows them to sell socially, targeting their products to very specific demographics. For new businesses, this could allow them to forego a significant investment to setup their own ecommerce website, and focus their sales on the global Facebook community.
  3. Payment System: PayPal has made a fortune on transactions that are low price and high volume. Facebook could become their own payment processor for all commerce done through the website. Making money in this manner requires high volume – something Facebook has in full supply.

Recommended Solution

The solution I recommend is a combination of all three. Together they build a comprehensive business platform for millions of small businesses in the US and globally. Greater adoption of the platform would include greater benefits:

  • Those who use the Facebook Payment System also receive their business listing for free.
  • The Facebook Payment system could be expanded to mobile devices, extending the social selling to consumer’s pockets.
  • Facebook could become what eBay was 5 years ago: THE prime place to start an online business with an active, engaged community of consumers.

IT ETHICS

Our use of technology is beautifully (and dangerously) ingrained. The way it has changed our daily lives is profound, and yet we are often unaware of those changes. I often observe a whole-hearted acceptance, even unrealistic allegiance to technology as the messiah of our age. There seems nothing we cannot conquer with technology.

I take naturally to technology, and it makes sense to me. I also have a streak of distrust of anything in society that is embraced without reflection. In the news headlines we see people grappling with the darker sides of technology: nuclear radiation, pollution, privacy in social media. This tension with our relationship to the tools we need in our lives is not new. It must’ve been quite the shock when the first stone tool was used to bludgeon someone instead of building a house.

The pace of technological growth is exponential, and I fear our ethical growth is lagging. It is difficult for us to synthesize as business leaders these new realities into our strategies, our organizational culture, and our personal lives.

In many of the scandals of the last decade, we see individuals whose “creative use” of the tools at their disposal outpaced their personal development. The selling and reselling of mortgage-backed securities, the credit-default swaps – these were all very creative usages of industry technology and the scale of modern economies. However, those involved were not grounded in the appreciation of the risk they were injecting into the system, for everyone from homeowners to securities holders.

Questions I want to be able to answer:

  • How do you develop an ethical culture in your Information Technology?
  • What are the ethical issues at stake in modern IT?

IT STRATEGY MATRIX

IT is much like web design, the industry I am in. Every 6-12 months there is a disruptive technology that makes the technology of several years ago obsolete. I would like a greater understanding of current technologies at use in business. Also, I would like to discuss emerging technologies that are potentially disruptive over the next several years.

Ultimately, my real goal is to develop the sort of IT strategy matrix that enables me to understand how to make good decisions with IT. The processor speeds, available technologies, user interfaces, and so forth are in perpetual change. However, with the proper decision making matrix, I can arrive at an optimal decision.

Questions I want to be able to answer:

  • What constitutes an optimal IT decision?
  • What criteria must be in order to reach that decision?

From my learning outcomes paper for IT Strategies at the University of Denver.

The true promise of Sustainable Development (SD) lies in its ability to drive Creative Destruction. Specifically, we need disruptive technologies that destroy wasteful, inefficient solutions to human needs and create elegant, simple, solutions that mimic nature’s own systems (known as biomimicry).

First we must recognize that our most wasteful solutions, such as coal fired power plants, were at one time revolutionary and innovative. They solved problems that have allowed for tremendous improvements in quality of life and productivity. They are, however, solutions which are not sustainable nor always particularly efficient.

Our tendency is to look for more efficient versions of a problem, a sort of iterative innovation. To be sure, these can be tremendously effective, as we see with the development of nuclear and solar power as potentially “cleaner” power generators. Or in the case of the microchip, we see how smaller sizes and faster speeds have made remarkable devices like iPhones possible.

However, tackling issues like our power production requires systems thinking, and innovation beyond our existing boundaries. We must think about not only how we make the power, but where and by whom. Can power be generated by those who use it where they use it, rather than by large conglomerates with terribly inefficient grids?

As Christensen et al. point out in Innovation Killers, this sort of innovation gets killed by several mass innovation murderers:

- The use of discounted cash flow (DCF) and net present value (NPV) to evaluate investment opportunities causes managers to underestimate the real returns and benefits of proceeding with investments in innovation.

- The way that fixed and sunk costs are considered when evaluating future investments confers an unfair advantage on challengers and shackles incumbent firms that attempt to respond to an attack.

- The emphasis on earnings per share as the primary driver of share price and hence of shareholder value creation, to the exclusion of almost everything else, diverts resources away from investments whose payoff lies beyond the im- mediate horizon.

Innovation which fundamentally changes how we perform core functions to modern society will confront tremendous obstacles. It will fight against the inertia of mature industries, threaten the dominance of accepted technologies, and likely fail often and spectacularly. However, like the one lightbulb Edison found that did work, innovation holds the promise of lighting up our world, providing the tools necessary for creating Sustainable Human and Economic Development.

The “Triple Bottom Line” (3BL) approach to Sustainable Development has not lived up to its early promise. This might be a strange thing to say, since as Gilding et al. point out in Single Bottom Line Sustainability even the President is talking about Corporate Ethics and Responsibility. Increasingly companies have Corporate Social Responsibility reports, and 3BL has made its way into the vernacular of many businesses.

However, Sustainable Development (SD) in the 3BL “is generally positioned as a moral imperative and obligation – a kind of modern corporate version of the medieval noblesse oblige. In fact it is often presented as contrary to the pursuit of profit. Many argue that companies should not just be focused on the ‘ruthless pursuit of profit’, but should pursue other things as well” (Single Bottom Line Sustainability). This has relegated it to a noble add-on — a topic for the PR department, not the C-suite.

Sectioning off SD as an add-on initiative is not unique. In business, policy-making, and in life we tend to think in terms of unrelated initiatives rather than systems. This is not at all a new phenomenon. In Systems Dynamics Modeling John Sterman quotes Sr Thomas More from 1516:

When you are confronted by any complex social system, such as an urban center or a Hamster, with things about it that you’re dissatisfied with and anxious to fix, you cannot just step in and set about fixing with much hope of helping. This realization is one of the sore discouragements of our century . . . You cannot meddle with one part of a complex system from the outside without the almost certain risk of setting off disastrous events that you hadn’t counted on in other. remote parts. If you want to fix something you are first obliged to understand . . . the whole system. . . . Intervening is a way of causing trouble.

3BL has brought much needed attention to the fact that the current form of our economic growth is not environmentally and socially sustainable. However, there is only one bottom line that truly matters, can be measured, and drives business. That is why a Single Bottom Line approach that focuses on creating value is the only way to shift SD from a nice add-on to a core driver of business.

By examining the entire value chain of your business, and involving representatives from all of your stakeholders, you can create value throughout the company. You align your drive to create value with your existing historical strengths, as well as discover inefficiencies and wastefulness in your system. A systems approach to SD allows you to unearth opportunities for creating value through innovation without burying your company.