Thaughts about Web2.0 - is it for marketing?

In trying to explain to potential clients what "new" marketing can actually do, I find people asking me about "what is Web 2.0?" For these who feel like they are not successful enough with their web page and maybe their newsletter, what should they want to do with a blog or a more targeted newsletter with splits, or even a wiki? Or what is the content on the web site really for? One thing I wanted to do is discuss and even explain some of the ideas of the O'Reilly Web2.0 posting. It's somewhat of an introduction, maybe even the most talked about "post" you can think about. But unlike the other O'Reilly writing, it seemed to explained in simple terms the "ideas" which have been driving the changes in how information and usage of it affects business. Whie O'Reilly does not talk specifically about business or more appropriately marketing impact, the whole idea and changes O'Reilly observed, are actually a reflection of marketing more than anything else. But the observation here has not taken into account the the more detailed marketing "work" or what I would call "transition to 'new marketing'". Background to this discussion: O'Reilly has observed the rapid change in the "type" of software and applications on the Internet. As a technology observer and publisher of technology books, he is well equipped to notice the changes which we sometime miss. He noticed that the nature of "software" or "application" and their use was changing dramatically. Once he noticed the big change, it was easy to classify and define the change(s). Basically, what the Internet has become, is more of a participatory media to the typical user. The applications on the web has simplified the process of content creation and editing. In more plain terms, it is much easier for most people to "author" a web site. Well, not exactly a complex one, but a blog can actually be a web site if the content is interesting and somewhat decent. The same goes for newsletters, simple pages and u-tube clips. So now, like every media type up to now, let the writing, photographing and video editing begin, and then get posted and passed along until the "buzz" phenomena gets going and becomes a standard practice.

---

O'Reilly's Web2.0 post - Trend setter or trend observer? You be the judge.
      This kind of analysis, or actually understanding of trends from people like O'Reilly, is something a marketer needs to do all the time. In the changes of old trends and emergence of new trends lies opportunity and trap. Not just for marketers, but for all the organization. For marketers the idea of opportunity and trap is more real than ever before. On one hand, the trends involve a set of tools which are useful to us, specially if we can use them to help "non-marketers" contribute written and photographic material. Contributory content has not been accepted in the mainstream corporate world but I think this is just a matter of time. A few commercial services has been offered but none has really succeeded. But this could change any day with the introduction of a more useful or a better user interface. Maybe a service with a feature someone needs and we can be faced with the new role of 'content editors'. Well, this is a quick introduction to something to start DOING!, not just thinking and watching. As I said to a recent customer: 'if McDonald's has a blog about healthy eating and how fries are fried, shouldn't a security company have a blog about viruses?' ~ I think so...

Mozilla SeaMonkey, comparing to Nvu and MS Web Authoring

        On the last post I looked at Nvu main product page. The idea was to look at a simple page for a simple product. The exercise was a little disappointing, mostly due to lack of continuity in the product's development. As I mentioned, by hunting a little on the web, it was clear how Nvu essentially was an independent development of Netscape's Composer. As Netscape products ended their high point, mostly due to competition from Microsoft, Macromedia and Adobe, the "code" was placed into an Open Source 'status'. Then, a group of independent developers started to take over and evolved the original product into the 'Mozilla' project you see today*.
        The Mozilla project seem to be turning out nice products. As a matter of fact, these products are useful specially today if you are going to use them for editing simple documents or you have a need for bare-bone application. They are on par with the Sun's Open Office tools, I would call them rev 2.0 equivalent to a product from a commercial software supplier (i.e. Adobe, Intuit, Symantec, etc). Last post I wrote a footnote about why these products are used for research and analysis. I keep on coming to the conclusion, mostly by gut feeling, that many commercial products have holes in their marketing. Not just missing part of the main message, or confusion in the positioning, targeting and audience focus. But, truly missing pieces of a product description which to most users would be considered a basic information. The simple open source applications do an excellent job in describing the basic product. They also simplify the message, mostly assuming that users will not have a problem with the decision leading to try the product. For some commercial products this is a crucial lesson to learn. Simply having the user download, install and take a look at the product would be an excellent start and a useful expanding the user base.

---

SeaMonkey project main page, simple and complete for a open source product
        The SeaMonkey project page is simple in design and content. It has only 9 entries on the right hand side menu (News, Downloads, Community, Documentation, etc.) The main section starts out with a download box. This is understandable since SeaMonkey is a very basic suite of Internet tools (Browser, e-Mail, chat and HTML editor). I presume the assumption is of a very familiar users who mostly come for the download function. The box has links for "features" and "release notes". Below the download section are sections for "project news" and "SeaMonkey suite". Unlike the Nvu page there are no specific features on the first page. Essentially the introduction to new users is on a higher level and less specific. This enable the design to be more simple and if a user is interested in more detail, there are links to a more verbose page. I think that in terms of a familiar user and a new user the content is sufficient. It seems to me that commercial applications tent to err on "more is better" and therefore highlight more "salesy" (some would call it "sexy") items as was seen in the Adobe Dreamweaver and Microsoft products pages. The categories they picked as main sub sections (on the menu) are self explanatory. The sub-sections also cover a broad range of user topics with only one section "Development" not related to end users. This is a good indication to a user that he is in the "right place". Since technology and products on the web cover a very broad range of abilities, some products while covering a broad range of user abilities tent to push for the "high-end" user. This is not a place to look at which user is targeted, but the analysis of what user is targeted and the intended message is a good place for a marketer to use in evaluating similar and competing products.

____________________
* I do not claim to be a 'technology historian' by any means. The descriptions here are strictly a shortcut to explaining how these products evolve and get to a certain point in time. I would appreciate any explanations on some of the events, specially details on the product features and overall operation. Technology issues and organizations (i.e. corporate activities in how the products were run) are less important at this point in time. BUT, more information on a product, better off the marketer's knowledge and faster she/he can take appropriate actions. The study of recent product history and the technology market is sadly neglected in the race to get products out and win market share. This is another topic worth a little research and a few articles on the blog.

Nvu page, very basic marketing content

In my review of the Microsoft FrontPage descendants' packages, I was going to review Nvu and Mozilla Composer (or Netscape equivalent). So finally, it's time to continue on that line of writing*. The Nvu page is quite old, and the program used a version of Mozilla Composer as a base. At the same time, it does show an attempt to market the product by listing "Features" at the center of the page. The first section of the page also gives a description of the Nvu as: "A complete web authoring system for Linux..." and a comparison statement: "... rival programs like FrontPage and Dreamweaver." These two sections constitute the very basic marketing content seen with small or simple programs.

---

Nvu main page, introduction, features and other info...

      From the point of view of a developer, description and features seem to be the "starting point" of a marketing effort. Actually, it seems natural to tell a potential user these two basic facts.

    In the case of Nvu, the developer seem to use the earlier Netscape / Mozilla product as a basis of user familiarization. He seem to assume that simple allusion to the other web authoring tools and the operating system is a good introduction. Basically they say: if you know what FrontPage and Dreamweaver is all about, we have it for Linux, Windows and Mac. On first look this seems like a simple way to get someone started. But in reality, this is a missed opportunity to differentiate or describe other features or capabilities. OS support is a very trivial user concern, but features for usage, tips, techniques, tools and final product output are much more productive and forceful. Features are also interesting as an introduction, but benefits and uses of a tool are also more productive. To the credit of the Nvu page, developing a forceful message and capturing the mind of a user quickly is not easy. Also, the formulation of strong benefit and application points takes time and thought. But I believe that specially for small products with little or no marketing resources, making the first impression strong is crucial. A first page of a small products is the one place where potential users can get information and download the program. As an exercise it would be interesting to see how small programs, utilities and programs given as demos describes themselves in a 'first look'. If you are a developer, technologist or a marketer of a small program or a utility, this kind of research and benchmarking is crucial to developing a meaningful message. This is specially true if you want attention and some type of user feedback or support. Open source and freeware / shareware programs have potential to become a useful piece of the ever growing technology puzzle. So take the time to develop an attractive and strong message. next, I will try to do a few more site evaluations and analysis, then go deeper into the content... so stay tuned and come back...

____________________
* Background and explanation on the use of these products as examples for my analysis: Web authoring tools are well understood. There are many ways to get a web page built. Web authoring tools are like text editors and drawing programs which are used to create pages (to be printed). So extending the analysis from a Microsoft Word to Microsoft FrontPage is not a huge jump in thinking. The big difference between a web editor and a text editor is the output. One is designed to create pages for the printer, the other goes t a web 'server'. A web server essentially translate formatting instructions and maybe some embedded programs. Also, there are enough users who understand the web authoring task, even if they don't understand all the details of different technologies and web standards. Finally, these programs have a very small user base, so they don't seem to attract the big marketing effort. BUT, they have enough complexity to illustrate marketing points which could apply to many technology products.

more on Categorizing Marketing Content...

    or is it categorizing any content in "marketing" terms ? whatever the descriptive term, which eventually will make sense to us, there are a more "dimensions" or "properties" that are interesting and important to look at. Product marketing does not happen in a vacuum. A company's image, ability and history are key to a proper understanding of a marketing message and the target audience. The specific market situation at the time is also crucial to understand, if the market situation is changing and competitors or the environment is changing, the message may reflect these changes. Sometimes looking at competitor's message and at specific events in the market it is easier to understand and analyze the message. Another dimension is the "association" of the company or product. Some products are associated with a group or a certain image. These determine the message and if the marketing is done in a specific way. Some companies need to advertise to a broad range of audiences. Therefore, web content is more influenced by what the other media advertisements are like. Some companies can separate the messages and have a different message on the web than in advertisements.

---

Intel's end consumer and technical mix marketing message
Let's take for example two large technology companies: Intel and Microsoft. Intel sells for the most part to computer manufacturers. A very technical sell which does not involve a large audience and for the most part does not need to have computer end user information. Microsoft also sells to essentially the same customers, specially operating systems (OSes) and office suites, but in this case the consumer is much more involved. Microsoft's products are what most people use everyday. Their features, packaging and use is something that Microsoft can "sell". With Intel these issues are less important to the user. But with Intel there is still the issue of new capabilities in terms of speed, graphic and network operation and the important message of a continuing improvement.
These two examples are simple, but the simple things are sometimes what makes for a believable and simple message where marketing can affect precept ion. In may cases you will see where this is not necessarily true. The marketing message is too biased toward a specific area and does not match what is expected by a reader or even a customer. Well, I have covered a large amount of area, specially in writing about definitions and "dimensions". So maybe we can get back at looking at different products, the landscape in which they exist and how we can use readily available information to do our own work. As you can see, there is a huge amount of information and we can get lost in looking at too many pages. But, we can also use available information to learn and analyze many aspects of a message and the content which constitute the message.

Two measures for evaluating marketing content

Crawl, Walk, Run, Race... ... LEARN, PRACTICE, PLAY, WIN!

In writing the first few entries of this blog, I was trying to think of what to actually accomplish. Blogs are a great way to start writing 'free form'. We don't need to even think about what comes out. But them two months later, we realize that maybe we should have thought about it. But getting started is sometimes a high enough hurdle, so 'just do it' Nike style maybe worth a few posts not related to anything in particular.
My view of marketing on the web comes from small organization product management. By that I mean, small product management or marketing teams in medium size technology companies. I have worked in a dozen or so companies with marketing staff of one to five on a product. This is very common in technology products where a product is new or started recently. These are products which from market introduction ($0) would sell up to about $10 million. When products grow beyond the "small" size, more marketing resources are invested. Engineering staff on small products ranged from three to ten core "designers". Sometimes a product would have some supporting staff such as an application engineer or a CAD tools engineer.

Small and medium product marketing is a necessary function in most companies. Start-ups and spin-off companies usually go through the phase of getting a product launched in the market. This is classically the case with new products. Small organizations have been the driving force behind innovation, specially in the technology world. This area has also been the most opportunistic of all, sometimes we forget this simple fact. Not because we get old and jaded, or we are in a small 'bubble' in a big industry. I think we loose perspective because we either forget what it was like to use something truly new, or we don't see anything truly new that can be done in our own little 'bubble'. There could be other reasons, we are all a little different in how we think of new ideas and we are very different in how we proceed to describe them and eventually give them life. Sorry about the wordy introduction, but this is truly going somewhere.

When I started looking for examples of how people describe products, I didn't have a framework. But I did have lots of ideas in my head. Mostly ideas of what I saw and what I discovered. Basically, the dimension of vitality and "freshness" - maybe it is excitement or wonder at a new product, feature or technology. This is a dimension that we do not take into account very often in defining a product. We don't describe this enough in marketing, specially to people who don't know or use a product. To old users, an added feature is just that, another small improvement. But to some people, the new feature could turn a product that was not useful into something very useful. Sometimes this change is not clearly seen by the marketer or the potential new user. The writing here helped me in understanding how to break down two new categories, or what I would define as "dimensions". By dimensions I mean a quantitative or qualitative measure that can be rated. This could be expressed in a rating system 1 to 10 or a ruler for display similar to Google's relevancy indicator. These two dimensions help not just in the marketing content but also in strategy.

Well, this is my instalment for today. It has been an exciting experiment to look at sites and rate their marketing content. It is even more exciting to think of what can be done next. If you have similar resources or want to contribute to writing about marketing content, please e-Mail me. Also if you have any ideas that I should be looking at, please don't hesistate to contact me. Finally, start thinking on a more strategic basis about what you say and how you say it. About what can be said and how to present to different audiance. The web has flexibility in format, presentation and SIZE that we had never had before. Marketing effectively can win big here, but it takes brain and lots of elbow grease. THANKS FOR READING and COME BACK!

They human factor: if you imagine it, will they build?

As I write these stories and look at what is created, specially on the web. I tend to wonder off and think about who creates this. Who had the ideas? who wrote the content? who designed the page and edited the images? who runs the servers and maintains the software? who, who, who... there are lots of hands moving the product, marketing, customers... along. I don't know most of the people who work at Microsoft, Adobe or Netscape (or for that matter the 'open source' developers all over the world working for the most part anonymously). But I do know plenty of technology workers, some are friends, even close ones. As technology keeps on evolving and growing, it seems like more people "stay" where they are and a few move and evolve with the times. But the problem with changing technology, specially at a fast pace, is the people who are slowly dropped off and stay behind. But these people did not lose their skills or even their traits and abilities (creativity, hard work ethic, loyalty, social abilities...). For the most part they just "didn't learn that new language" (perl, java, xhtml) or "didn't use that new application" (photoshop, gimp, frontpage). So these people AND their specific specialization area, fall behind and slowly die off.

---

Listings for software QA jobs in the Boston MA area (Nov. '07)
So the "outsiders" of the field simply say: "train them" they simply need to learn new skills. They know how to program in 'C' so what should be so hard in learning 'Java'? After all, the people who designed Java "told everyone that the language was made to follow 'C' and even use the same concepts of 'C++'", who what's the problem? Well, do you remember the beginning of the Japanese car invasion in the US? When people were buying Toyotas, Hondas and Datsuns (the Nissan company was even afraid to use their own name in America!) instead of Chevys and Dodge? When politicians, economists, trade union leaders and management gurus were telling the US car companies: "just make the better, can't you just do that?"

---

Oh, if they could 'just do that!' wouldn't they? Well the same old "I will tell you how to fix your problem" pontificators are doing the same thing with 'US' (the techies, geeks, propeller heads, pick your label). All of a while, we go through the most wrenching "business cycle". So back to the things I see... at least five of my closest friends including me, have been under or unemployed. Mostly coming from serious real companies (Lucent, EMC, Digital, Avid Tech, Cypress Semi, Altera) with real careers (programmers, chip designers, software QA engineers, marketing managers). So what's going on here? Can't we figure it out and get on with it? Convince the new technology managers that we have skills, knowledge and desire to build the next 'Netscape browser'? or 'wireless router front end'? or appeal to corporate buyers to look at the new 'application'? Well, the transition to "new" is not as easy as it might seem. But on the other hand, even "new" businesses and technologies lose a huge deal when they don't use available "old" talented workers. Actually, when you take it all into account, pretty much the consensus will be on using more experienced workers than "fresh new ones".

---

Well, as we move into new technologies of self publishing, everything "really" online, and dominance of content over programming and application development, things are again changing for everyone. I seems like this is not going to change, but maybe we are more able to change things with the tools we are developing. Even a blog and a wiki is a better way to do things than previously. We had newsgroups for a long time, but the interface, operation and availability is much better with blogs. So, it seems like the 'old' guys who have used newsgroups can migrate to blogs... but maybe they don't want to? or just want to keep on going the old way... even if it means sitting around the basement for a while and playing on the self build machine instead of going off to work in a lab at DEC... or maybe not... anyway, hope this gets people thinking, seriously, about more steadiness, continuity and loyalty in our business. Maybe we can learn something from GM of the 1980's, and not have National Semiconductor ask for a loan guarantee from the next president, the way Lee Iaccoca did... or maybe not.

Is blogging good for business? or is it too hard, expensive, time consuming...?

I just visited a potential client / employer for a short interview. This is a security company that supposedly has a great product. They also claim to have great technology which is very unique. The story is one you and I have heard a few dozen times, maybe even hundreds of times. Small to medium size company, moving along at a decent pace, hit a "bump on the road", fell "off the tracks" and slowed down, coming back from "a setback" but sure to "make it to the big times again" ... OK, OK, OK I am getting a little wordy, but this is a story that we all know. So getting back to the title of this story... this marketing VP was telling me that "we have been thinking about a blog for a year now. We started writing stories and finally realized that we can do it. Now we are not exactly sure if this is something we can "keep up on"..." or something like that. McDonalds sells Hamburgers and Fries and they have a blog. The Democratic Party sells ideas that we are not sure about, and changes it's mind, they have a blog. But this Internet security company ends up spending more money, time and effort on paper brochures to put in their lobby and mail out to customers than inform customers or potential buyers on their updates and new discoveries.

---

A static web site for Internet security
So this is a ridiculous example? Not really! Actually, it's a very typical example. It takes a long -> long -> long -> time for technology AND the implication of it's use to BUSINESS (read make money) to be seen. This we all know, not just from Internet applications, but from steam shovels and hydraulic ones of 50+ years ago. But there is also something that may be bigger. Like the 'slower' evolution that is actually a bigger trend, there is something that the 'general business' writers and teachers don't talk about much. Is the communication among new technology community members. Tim O'Reilly has been blogging for a long time. Actually, his blog has turned into a newspaper column more than anything else. I say that because it is no longer a 'off the cuff' personal writing source as much as a well written and well PRESENTED site. But you still see "old school" marketers and business manages make excuses. So what to do? Well, it's a little like the 'who moved my cheese' story (book on Amazon). But it's also a little like moving a little faster to get thing done better.

---

I use to make fun of the slow movers when I thought I was the 'early adopter'. Than I realize that just being an early adopter for the sake of trying things out and boxes full of gadgets and software boxes in the basement was not all it's cut out to be. Now I am back to pushing more adoption. Because in some fields we don't have any choice. In Internet technology field and in many business fields that depend on fast information transfer, the blogs, wikis and quick authoring pages are not necessary but they do SELL more. They also change the way customers work with us and the way we work inside the company. For some, new technology is like what was described almost 20 years ago by a co-worker: running down a hill, losing your breath, and the hill keep on getting steeper! Why? I think it's because lots of us all over the world are running on our own little hills, and when we see others having fun before they crash down at the bottom, they start running too. But also, it's the unleashing of a bunch of technologies all at once. Some of them trivial like faster communication and better transport. If computers hardware was not being made so economically in Asia, we would probably not be able to do even a fraction of the software we can do. Well... I can go on and on, but basically the message is: get moving with what you think is "new" sooner than later. Even if it seem hard to 'keep up' right now, it usually turns out that it is not. And if you are not sure, just start small and don't tell the whole world about it... quite yet... which in the end, will make you laugh and seem foolish... but that is the nature of running down a hill that won't stop... there is good news here too... so come back to the next post... good news from the leading edge...

Rating sites for experience, knowledge and gaining competitive advantage

After writing the Microsoft FrontPage and Adobe Dreamweaver product page analysis, I wanted to criticize negatively some marketing aspects of these sites. Than I realized that this is not going to be as helpful and explaining what I was disturbed about. So I stopped the negative thoughts and tried to see what was really behind the "not so good marketing" seen here. Like other realms of the business, marketing people think that they 'control' the web media. Well, not really control as much as 'need' it more than others. Well, this is not exactly what you see out there. Marketing has its place, and good marketing helps sales, engineering and even customer support. But the web is a media that is needed by all business aspects. Once that proposition is understood and accepted by all parties, things start getting useful to analyze and discuss.

---

So the question of what a good page should be, is restated: What would a good marketing page should be? Ahaa, here we go...

First of all, we could probably simplify things by breaking them into categories. This is helpful because there are many resources out there analyzing, testing and advising you how to 'market' on the Internet. Also, there are non-marketing web and page design experts and more books than you can read in a lifetime. Essentially, we can start working on worksheets and guides to go through the design, creation and integration of a single page. Then move on to the phase of putting together a section or a full product section. Finally, worksheets on specific areas which are general and not necessarily marketing related would be nice to have. This is something I have been looking for in ages. Basically, something to organize our thoughts about how to 'look' and 'read' other people's work. This is specially useful in marketing organizations that continue to improve, innovate and grow their message, content and reach.

---

MS Expression page
One of the first "dividing into categories" step seem to be defining some general page categories. In the software product space, I would categorize pages as:

• Information: product packaging, availability, version, license. etc.


• Sales: product price, order information, channel availability, packaging, etc.


• Technical: product operation, features, capability, use model / demos, etc.


• Support: user support, installation, workarounds, tutorial, specific feature operation, etc.


• Marketing: benefits, success stories, solution-packaging, capability, overview, etc.

These categories apply to what I would call "core content". There are other ways of evaluating product information based on organization, content quality, usability and other general web related subjects. At this point I would point you to the many resources available which address general web information subjects.
      In future posts I will go into the sub-categories of each of these, maybe even update or expand the categories. Eventually, product related information could be

---

Lets start looking at what I reviewed previously and see if the categorization helps simplify analysis and yields better results. Later on we can look at the way others analyze sites and see how categories we use help in designing, writing content and assembling pages for product marketing. So next time... on deck:

• Adobe Dreamweaver


• Microsoft FrontPage


•  - Microsoft Sharepoint Designer


•  - Microsoft Expression Web


• NVu (Open source)


• Netscape Composer (also Mozilla)

Is this the "innovator's dillema" or just technology "evolution"?

I was listening to a conversation two young web developpers were having. They were talking about the 'advantages' of 'branding'. The Internet is creating a new crop of marketers, some are taking a 'page' from the old marketing hymn book - using old techniques in new ways. So these new business managers are going through a phase of branding which is now a hot new topic. But the good news is there is much more marketing, sales and management knowledge out there which can be recycled. In his now classic book "The innovator's dilemma" Christiansen described the phenomenon of great firms who fail because they do not innovate to the next "stage".

---

Christiansen's book made the techies sit-up and take notice...

But there is something more dramatic happening now. Not only single large firms fail, industries actually fail. They fail because of a complete change in the way things are done. So why did I title this post '... or just technology "evolution"'? -- because maybe both cases apply. Lets look back to the current successes in the Internet world. Actually, the businesses that have replaced the 'old school' (I keep on hearing this term in daily use.) Amazon has replaced a great deal of small and medium size stores. The ones hit the hardest are the specialty and technical stores. But, the good news is that some of these stores have been able to 'join' Amazon as an 'affiliate' and sell their books online. The strange phenomena here is the absence of competing small sites. Technical book stores like FatBrain and Computer Literacy were going strong and highly useful, but that was in the 1980's and early 1990's (FatBrain started out as a regular store, I remember it on North 1st in San Jose when working in the area, people use to spend their lunch time browsing and eating). While the sales of computer books is going through the roof, it was not happening in the stores as much. Take a look at the blog entry on Oreillynet.com.

---

So in some respects maybe this is an 'evolution' of bigger proportions. I call it an 'evolution' because the whole 'world' of book selling is changing (in the retail book business, has changed already!). Not just in certain areas, but in all aspects. The retail chains and specialty niches are just one aspect. The buyer behaviour is another. The overall structure of the business (you can't get Don Knuth to come out and speak on Amazon -- or maybe you could?) So what do we do to survive this bigger 'evolution'? Christiansen has followed up the 'problem' book with 'The innovator's solution'. But for some reason that has not been taken notice like the 'dilemma' book. The 'solution' issue is a whole lot more complicated than the 'problem statement' alone. It is also much more interesting. Just like the 'dilemma' book with its two examples (steam shovles and disk drives), there are a few good solution examples. Companies that have moved from one technology generation to the next (actually Barnes & Noble and the buying of FatBrain.com is somewhat of an example). Well, here is a nice little lesson in retailing, or is it in sales strategy? Whatever you call it, the 'new web techies' will surely learn something from it and will eventually go out and build another 'Amazon' ~ or will they take over Barnes & Noble? Let's wait out and see....

Thinking about writing - what's worth writing about?

        When I first started writing blogs, it seemed merely as a way to get my story out. Looking around at blogs and sites, we quickly realize that there is a potential to use this as a real professional communication tool. Some like Eckel and Greenspun put up full books with all the knowledge and professional experience. Actually, in a blog its much easier than taking on a full book project. Once I started thinking seriously about writing professionally related articles, I had to think of what to write. My experience is in semiconductor marketing and engineering. I also held field positions in storage networking (Fibre Channel) and EDA. As they advise you in creative writing: "write what you know". So this advice I am going to follow. I plan to research and write about the world of technology marketing. Starting from what to say (outbound marketing and product marketing) to what to actually do (product definition). I also have an opinion about work and business of technology. Which sadly not many people take as seriously as the "core" or "raw" technology itself. While these areas cover a great deal of territory, I will focus on a few specific fields.

---

Phil Greenspun's - "Alex" book; first published 'on the Internet' as a revolutionary move!

The ideas I have for writing here span a few areas:


• Marketing in technology: product, strategy, experience, knowledge, etc.


• Opinions and analysis of current events in the technology business.


• Resources in marketing, product management and technology sector


• Personal stories on technology career and work.

---

Eckel's - Thinking in Java; author says that the book was much better because of release on the web
Well, like all ambitious or trivial projects, "the proof is in the pudding", so let's get started. Eventually, the work will speak for itself. So enough with that.
      The next area of articles will deal with looking at product web sites. The last articles on Adobe Dreamweaver and Microsoft FrontPage are a good start. They are general enough for most people to get the basic concepts. My experience is in Storage, EDA and semiconductor, which tend to be more complex marketing area. The world of technical marketing (i.e. for highly technical markets) tend to focus less on 'simple messages' and much more on competitive technology. I am not sure if this is a correct approach. That's is what is worth looking at. Do marketers and technologies "think seriously about what they say and how they say it?" Do companies put full emphasis on strategies and actual deliverable messages which potential users can use and act upon? Finally, it is interesting how companies and individuals position, direct and eventually deliver their marketing message.
        In general, I believe that marketing is taken seriously by technologists, but I believe that the resources to do match other areas in the mix (engineering, research, operation, manufacturing, etc.) This concept is not new. Others have written and advise on more resources and more professionalism in technology marketing. One of the people who makes this his 'raison d’être' is Ralph Grabowski. His basic tenant: invest in marketing, otherwise you are dead. Others tend to say it with their basic spin: do what I have done: P/R, product definition, positioning, sales strength, etc. Well, all these ideas and resources will come up as we get into the writing.

---

Grabowski's diagram of marketing investment vs. product success (actually company success)
       My experience is that in most technology based companies marketing is indeed under appreciated and under funded. Also, it's been my experience that technologies in general do not know what to ask from marketers. Technologies know to ask for customers to "see" or "demonstrate" (try out) their product. But they do not know about the core marketing tasks and what to make of them in their context. This is an area that is also well worth writing and researching here.
        Well, this is a start in explaining the aim and interest of this blog. Hopefully you will find it useful and interesting. Reading other blogs and seeing how people write on the web, its obvious that subject, points of view and strong opinions shift as people comment and get involved. PLEASE leave a comment or e-Mail me. I do not to be controversial to the point of eliciting a comment, but in all these discussions its useful to see what other know and have experienced. Also, when it comes to resources, nobody is a 'master of the Internet' ~ there are always things to know and to find out. So please lend me a hand with resources, comments and information. T H A N K       Y O U !

Microsoft Frontpage - decision, confusion or clarity?

After the last article on Adobe's Dreamweaver's page, I decided to look at similar pages. In the software world there are many similar products and product that are sold to similar market base. The one advantage software marketing has is the ease of gathering competitive and useful information. The obvious page authoring and design competitors are: Microsoft Frontpage, Nvu (open source), Netscape Composer. From there the list goes down to really small programs. But in this line up, there is an interesting twist. Microsoft FrontPage is not really a contender. First of all, the program is being discontinued. But not really, it is actually being "split" into two programs: Share Point Designer and Expression Web. But here lies the twist, the main FrontPage page has this "decide what you need" graphics. This is something rarely seen on the web. Although it does explain that this product is actually becoming two. For the professional web designer not using Share Point, this is probably a confusing explanation.

---

Microsoft FrontPage splitting into two
So let's get back to our original point. Clarity, Focus and Relevance is a little fuzzy at this point. Clarity I tried to define as message divided into smaller sections, using standard terms, relevant to each other, focus on a single idea, amplify in later sections. But here, there is a full article, in small sections on how the FrontPage product is divided. Overall, this is an OK way to show what happened to a tool that 'migrates'. But you have to think and explore. Theoretically, the message is clear. But it could have been more clear if there were more explanations on each product, or differentiation between the two. For an old page designer, it seemed to me that "Expression" was the "orphaned" product. Sometimes things seem a little like they really are. For some reason, just like what happened with Photoshop about 10 years ago, Adobe has focused very strongly on the professional designer. I think here they won over Microsoft. If you want to know why, take a look at the description of each product. If you need more info, both products are downloadable for a trial period. Maybe here we can also do a comparison. But for me, the message from Adobe is a little more convincing.

---

There is another point here that needs expanding. For fairness sake, the Microsoft FrontPage page is a little dated. It has been there probably since mid 2006. This was a little early for AJAX with the tabs, collapsible 'accordion' ads and sections and other nice GUI tricks. (These make a page look like a PC program, and this is the message behind the new updates to these new tools). But clarity is not a matter of layout or graphics. In the FrontPage article there is a "Find more information on the new Microsoft Web authoring tools" section with links to the new products, that should have been at the top somewhere. Maybe even accessible from the graphics. The section on "Which tool is for you?" should have more on features. It looks to me like the Share Point Designer, or actually the Share Point product manager won out over the Expression product manager. Or more likely, neither one thought enough about the implication of a little more information for each product.
--- Well, it's time to move on. Live, observe and learn. I would like to look at the other pages, Nvu and Netscape Composer. These are simpler 'free' tools, but still draw a crowd and useful in designing pages which are more hand coded than WYSIWYG designed. Looking at them has another purpose: what do you do with something free that does not have a marketing budget? Do you just put it "out there" - 'if we build it they will come' style? That has been the "open source" marketing argument for a long time. Let's see if it works? Where is it done well? What can be learned? and finally, how we do it when we need it (don't laugh, even companies with cash in the bank don't run to advertise too quickly.)

Clarity, Focus and Relevance for Product Manager (and Marketers)

When we develop a message, trying to make sure clarity, focus and relevance are there is not hard. Usually I start out by prioritizing the message components. Let's take the Adobe Dreamweaver's example, first we separate the whole message into 'chunks' or 'elements'.

Dreamweaver's page has sections for:

---



• What's new: Develop Websites and applications; Reasons to Upgrade


• Product Overview: Whats Dreamweaver CS3?; Get the details


• Feature Tour: Spry framework for AJAX & details; Photoshop CS3 integration; Compatibility Check; CSS Advisor; CSS layouts; Manage CSS; Device Central CS3; Bridge CS3


• Product Selector: Design; Web; Photography; Video


• News: What's new in Dreamweaver CS3; What's new in Device Central CS3; Best Practices of CSS; Dreamweaver Developer Toolbox

Notice that the category (tab) divisions are fairly standard software terms. These are useful in the message of each tab's content. Using well understood and accepted terms is one trick of clarity in a message. 'What's New?' is a clear term and will not confuse most readers. Using tab sections also helps in focusing the message. When a writer wants to divide a message into sections, standard divisions, similarity in context and relevance help in making the message clear. Readers don't need to figure anything out, they know and understand the divisions, all they need to see in the content in each division.

---

Once a reader is inside each 'tab' section, there are further sub-sections. This techniques of hierarchical division of text is standard in web content. In the "What's New?" section, we see: "Develop Websites and Applications" and "Reasons to Upgrade". Again these headings are simple and can also be considered industry standard. They are standard terms for software application communication, but not all users are completely familiar with them. But their simplicity helps in making the terms clear. The first section has one short paragraph explaining: '...components for building dynamic user interfaces, and intelligent integration...' with the terms of each feature clearly deliniated. In the next section we simply see a list of features. These are less clear without a full sentence, but are still clear because they highlight a few things. Notice also that each topic is by itself. This helps in not packing too many idead into one sentence, bullet or paragraph. When writing content for the web, people expect ideas in small increments of text. Since there is so much information, we don't want to have it slow... - this is clearly different than writing for a book or a printed brochure.

OK, let's recap a few points for clarity of a message:

---



• Divide the message into sections.


• Use standard terms and concepts.


• Make the sections relevant to each other.


• Focus on one or two messages in each section.


• Give more information if needed further on, don't overstuff the sections.


• Use simple sturctures, paragraphs, lists, diagrams, images to quickly say something.

---

Well, that's all for the Adobe Dreamweaver page for now. A good exercise will be to do the same analysis with other similar product. Dreamweaver is a product targeted at professional designers and web authors. Microsoft, Oracle, Intuit, Symantec, Borland and other companies have products which sell into this or similar space. It would be interesting to compare how each company gets their product message across. This could be in the case of an upgrade version (like this example) or in other situations.

Defining Calrity, Focus, Context, Relevance...

Last post I looked at Adobe's Dreamweaver page. I look at pages all the time, basically it's like a lab, tutor and critic all at once. The one nice thing about the web, information is always there, we just need to look and think. It also helps to learn from people who observe the we on a regular basis and maybe even these that actually make it a profession. Jakob Nielsen at wwww.useit.com has been an observer of web sites for a long time. He has focused on 'usability' which for most part turns out to be more concerned with style, architecture (navigation) and overall structure. The usability issue was a big problem when the web started. The new media format needed people to define how we use information in a new channel.
I found out over the last three years that for most people content is just as big of a problem. Message, focus, context, relevance, balance... the things we learn in college English classes. What makes a good novel, play or article in a newspaper is just as relevant to web authoring as it is on print. Actually, we all know that content which doesn't flow, keep our interest, informs, helps... does not make it to the eyes of anyone. The web has so much information, that poorly written and organize information, no matter how relevant, does not make it at all.
In writing about Adobe's Dreamweaver, I was wondering on how to review and 'rate' the content of sites. Actually, not only the content, but the 'feel', 'fit', 'flow' and the 'usability' but in terms of real useful and actionable information. So I set out to find a check list, guidelines or even a tutorial. I am still in the midst of gathering the information. But like learning to write English in college, I think that the whole idea of a simple check list is not a real solution. If writing a good article or a short story was so easy, life would be very easy for us marketers and product managers. We would sit down, write an entry every day and in two to three weeks have a small site to describe a product. Than we would spend a couple of weeks in marketing the information we developed and soon people would come, read and buy our products. As a good Hollywood western, and we would ride happily into the sunset.

---

Bechtel Corporate Page: Simple message in a complex business
I think that each and every product manager and marketer need to figure out what she/he needs and go ahead and develop a plan and the content. Some of use do not write well, but we all need to plan, define and organize our ideas and goals toward the clarity and relevance of the message. But all this work is not very useful if you need an army of writers, editors and Nielsen caliber experts helping you design and deploy a site. Most of the writing and editing is done by small groups (up to 20) who need to get their products explained and used by a small number of users (hundreds). So anything like the US Health and Human Services: Researched-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines (292 pages in PDF) or Nielsen's Designing Web Usability and Homepage Usability: 50 Websites deconstructed plus a few other ones. Anyway, with all this talk, let's get to the core of the issue. How do we simply and quickly give "non-writers" / "non-editors" help in designing and implementing a clear message? I think the answers lies in the article about 'what is new media?' -- Like teaching every student to write English in college, so is the path to designing and writing a message that is clear and conveys what a product should do for a customer. A little different, but very much related in terms of process and results.

---

Well, something to think about, if you are interested in this process or any of the ideas here, send a message. Hopefully I will have time to get started with guidelines, check lists and reference material for content clarity, focus, context and relevance. After all, what good is a nice site with all the latest technology, content management and graphics if the message does not make it to the reader? This is truly a question that has been asked before...
REQUEST: if anyone has a writing manual in PDF please let me know.
The Bechtel Corporate page is an nice introduction to a very large message. Notice that this $25B corporation can define and explain its core message on one page. It comes down to what you want to say.

What is your message?

Last post I wrote about 'clarity' of your message. Essentially, if your message is not clear to the 'audience' - the message is lost. To start in getting a clear message, it is crucial to decide what you want to say. Some companies want to emphasize a certain point. This is usually with companies with many products and solutions for different users. Even if you have one software product or service, usually it makes sense to highlight a few features or uses. Lets look at some software companies and their product. Adobe develops a few applications for content creation and management. One of their main web development product is Dreamweaver. The product does many things and can be used in many ways. Essentially its a toolbox for 'wysiwyg' designers (who do site design without content management). After you move down from the banner and a promotion for the new version, there are a few tabs: "what's new", "product overview", "feature tour", "product selector" and "news". It is obvious that this page screams "new version". Now, I don't think that Adobe marketing or the Dreamweaver product manager would turn down new-unfamiliar users. But they chose to go after people who essentially "know" the product. Not just people who know "about" the product. The message is that "we have CSS, XSLT and XHTML now!"

---

Dreamweaver - October 2007
~ If a user is unfamiliar with web standards, this could be interpreted as a turn-off. But I don't think Adobe is worried about this problem. The few totally new potential customers for Dreamweaver would have to put up with a little discomfort. The new users are probably going to be confused about lots of things, so that would not be a problem.
Also notice that Adobe has kept the page simple and fairly clean. I am sure that there are opinions in the Adobe camp that would choose other messages. If there are changes in message from time to time, the page can change. For now it says, new product version, come get it.
If you have ideas on clarity of the message. If you want to tell the audience about product marketing in the software area, send me a message and I will post or write an article.

---

Actually, the concept of making the main message simple and clear is something that can help marketing. The Internet has made us all "impatient readers". We tend to look at the screen and quickly search for the few words that will tell us "what is going on here?" This way, we know if to keep on reading, go further down, settle down for a 'slow read' ... lots of things can be done at this point. This gives marketers the opportunity to send a message in small capsules. It also gives the audience the chance to process one idea at a time. Sometimes you can put two messages in one place, but not much more. The good news is that the web allows us to change the priority of the messages very quickly. When Adobe Dreamweaver gets a little 'older' and this version is not such hot news. They can move to another 'message' and actually keep the ideas to the audience fresh. This is something that is hard to do with printed brochures and video DVDs. It is even hard with CD presentations that you used to hand out in trade shows a few years ago. Anyway, I will review a few more 'messages' from software products in the next few entries. I think this answers last entry's issue of "why doesn't marketing tell the customer what the product does?" (so the salesman will not have to travel twice to make the sale?) But than again, doing it on the web is a little easier and more elegant than a two page brochure (I think)

Clarity (message, intention, strategy, operation...)

The last article mentioned the difficulty of marketing a software product. This is a good example of one of the most important and useful marketing task. The task of clearly delivering a message. One of the tasks of marketing is formulating and delivering the "message". Sometimes this is not such an easy task. As Charles Zedlewski mentioned, he sees marketing as a wasted effort when a salesman has to travel twice to a customer, "simply tell him what the product does". He thinks that every message a customer sees should be clear and to the point. I guess, that means that the "first" message should tell the customer what the "product does". The formulation and prioritization of a message to a customer is certainly an important marketing role, but more important is the clarity of the message. Maybe in the case Zedlewski mentioned the strategy was to tell the customer that the product is "great". By that I mean, impress a customer on features, performance, technology, etc... In this case, marketing did not fail but maybe did not hone the message clearly enough. The fact that Zedlewski did not receive the message of "greatness" may mean that the message have to be clarified. That could mean simplification, strengthening, amplification or even redirection / change to the message. In any case, the first task of correcting a message "issue" is clarification. If the message is not clear, it almost does not make any difference "what" the message is.

---

Clarification of a message is not a hard task. First of all, are you sure of your message? Sometimes a company or even a marketing department are not completely in agreement on what can be said. Second, make sure the message is simple and has one point. Too many times we try to give a message of too many things. My software is... "fast and cheap and good and slick and easy and..." Pretty soon you have to give people air to breath just to finish reading. If the lowest person in the customer chain can not understand clearly what you want to say, it will not be used effectively (it may not be used at all). I will go into message writing and simplification in later entries. To make sure there is clarity in the message, test it with internal people and trusted customers. If the marketing material is for sales people, ask them what they understand and can clearly explain the content. Try to test the material with less trusted customers. Sometimes a good sales person can be used in the field to carry the material to a few customers. Try not to filter "the good" customers "the bad" ones. Every point of view will give you feedback which may be useful. Be ready to change things, internally generated materials the first time out usually do not hit the right spot. Veteran marketers with experience will tell you stories about misunderstood messages. This goes for copy and images. It also goes for general strategy and overall aim. While we are in our own "internal world" - the rest of the world is somewhere else. Not necessarily in an opposite place, just different enough not to "get" what you want them to "get". In most cases, misunderstanding is just wasteful, you had a chance to say something, it was not delivered correctly. In other cases a badly delivered ad can actually hurt sales. One thing that I remember from old times is the famous McGraw-Hill advertisement of the "man in the chair". It actually does not say that "you didn't advertise at all" as much as "you didn't advertised correctly - with us". Which is the whole idea behind the business-to-business press.

---

Next time... what is your message? is what you saying what you 'should' say?

Basics: if there is "new media" / wikis / blogs...

than, what can we learn from "old media"? Printed brochures, advertising, trade shows, collateral for sales support, the work of many, still going on in most places. What about the other fields of marketing, market research, branding, positioning...? Should we emulate or improve on formats, lingo, style, approach, 'content', core & periphery subjects? Or should we go into this with a new approach? Well, this question is a lead-in for how to start transitioning traditional marketing to the "new media". There is a trend in new technology to develop new techniques and organization, and ignore the past. But there are still the core ideas, knowledge and uses that are simply fundamental communication of ideas. These are relevant to the 'new media' of the web.
I started looking at what there is of "old School" marketing and see what can be done, what makes sense to do, and finally, what people are already doing in terms of examples, success and just simple attempts (who seem to fall short). If you have any ideas or examples, please send them to me and I will incorporate them into the writing.

---

In an article about product marketing in the Yet Another Software Blog Blog, Charles Zedlewski writes on enterprise software product marketing. He writes on the lack of organization, or better put "agreement" of what product marketers need to do for sales. This is not a new concern. The line between sales and marketing is continuously tested and moved. The roles are changing, you can see the changes by titles, some organizations have 'sales and marketing' departments and VPS. Some have only 'marketing', some only 'sales' and some both. Well, this does not help us, but it shows that there is confusion.
The issues that Zedlewski brings up are not at all new or unique. Deciding what marketing and sales will do is only the first step. Then an organization as a whole or in part (i.e. marketing) have to decide on the message and how to deliver it. That includes at least branding, positioning and training / delivery. In a whole, technical organizations seem to have an additional problem. For the most part, they do not hire professional or trained marketing staff. Because of the nature of the products, the marketing is usually done by technical people who have chosen to move from engineering disciplines into the business side. This makes the marketing weaker in terms of the fundamentals. Also, the management is usually very technologically or product driven, which means that the marketing side suffers. Well, enough with the gripes, lets look at each of these issues in turn and see if we can find examples of good results and attempts.

---

To hunt, analyze and review marketing work from the software is not an easy task. I will start with setting a set of criteria based on what information is available. Then I will look at a few vendors and see what we have in terms of material. Then we will start the analysis. Until next time... /AmiV

Is there "new media" in blogs and wikis?

I spoke with a friend in the advertising industry about "blogs and wikis" and his comment was something like: '... a few customers once in a while ask us to write content for blogs when they need a message and they ask them to "write content" ... but, doing blogs is a lot of work and it's expensive... ' In general the "established media" world sees the Internet as a "new media" - most think of it as not really ready for "prime time". To some extent they are right, print, electronic and even direct marketing is still running at full steam... and a train moving in its tracks at full steam is hard to stop and harder to turn.
I have been looking at blogs and wikis for examples of serious and useful marketing work. At this point I am not looking for a pattern or a "method" from anyone out there, I think it's too early for that kind of information to be readily available. But, there are many examples of people who do not see the "blogs and wikis" as "new media". Why do I think that "new media" is not a useful model for what people think the Internet can do? Because this seems like a what had happened in the past, the history of distant past and more recent history. It seems to me that most people who are not using the Internet as a primary form of marketing are not going to see the value in the "new media" until its too late (for them). So these people are not the ones to look for guidance. But for people who either can't afford "old media", or are starting to market a new product or with a new effort, it makes sense to start with the Internet. That is why I am looking at the blogs, wikis, newletters and quick edit pages (i.e. google pages, myspace, etc). The idea is to see how essentially direct marketing is used by marketing managers DIRECTLY. I think that we can find good examples so this is going to be my effort in the next few weeks. (I am looking for equivalent of "direct" marketing but other forms of marketing is also OK) If you have any examples or comments, please write to me. THANKS !

---

Let's get to the next part, learning from history and seeing how the big guys used similar situations to create big products. To look at historical examples, I chose to look at an older shift in technology and marketing (40 - 50 years); I became aware of just now, the story of Playboy. Now, some of you will not like this example, but it will quickly illustrate my point. Hugh Hefner started Playboy as a fluke, not exactly sure that it would work and what it would turn out to be. There were all kind of objectionable remarks about the "new venture". Some said that Playboy will not be able to find girls to pose, that did not turned out to be a problem at all. Anyway, let's move beyond the Playboy "idea" - what Hugh Hefner did with magazines at the time is what the Internet is doing to "media". Hugh Hefner figured out that magazines is not a new way to get the "message" out, but a whole new way to get a "new message" out. Actually he created a new "product". The magazine was not a "shrunk" book or an monthly update in a specific area, it WAS THE PRODUCT. As magazines became cheaper to print and mail, as the acceptance of more risque content and as men demanded or 'accepted' more sexy and personal content. In hindsight this is easy to analyze, but I believe the the Playboy story is not about planning and "designing" as much as a gut feeling - jump into the waters without thinking too much. In today's more accepted Internet "self publishing" world, we have a very similar situation.
I hope that the Playboy example was not too vague or controversial, specially if you are offended by Hefner's content. But it's a lesson well learned. Next time I will write about Blogger.com and a few other more 'recent' examples. Using technology, shift in opinions or social norms and economic / product capability. I look at successful products and services because they usually have a good lesson to teach. I think that as we go about using current technologies in a changing environment learning from others is one way to think creatively. Also, it's a way of keeping a better perspective. It's always crucial to make sure we do not miss an opportunity to go after a market or capture a better competitive position. More about this aspect of newsletter/blog/wiki/web marketing in the coming stories.