Gavin Baker

Last week, I wrote a post on the New Streak (where I blog for work), on my participation on a panel at the Entrepreneurial Imperative 2010, a conference focused on entrepreneurship and hosted here in Knoxville, TN.  I’d highly recommend this conference as it’s one of the biggest groupings of entrepreneurial minded folks I’ve seen in Knoxville.

My session was wittily titled “Social Networking – Untangling the Web of Cutting Edge Technology.”  I talked about marketing for startups and particularly on if Facebook or Twitter was a better place to start your marketing efforts. Wondering where I suggested?  Check out the post for the full answer.

Related articles

• UT connects executives, students in new venture (knoxnews.com)

I recently learned that American Express aka AmEx is launching a new card called the Zync card aimed at 20-30 year olds. This piqued my interest so I figured this would be a good time to explore why would I use American Express, who uses it and the major benefits. For comparison I’m currently using a CapitalOne rewards card.

For starters, all I knew of American Express was the infamous “Black Card” which American Express refers to as the Centurion Card. If you’re already familiar with AmEx skip this overview. Essentially American Express cards are charge cards (read no balance) vs a credit card (interest bearing balance). Additionally, American Express is a card you pay annually to use  ($$ depends on card) and they have a favorable point rewards system. The various people I asked about why they use American Express mentioned the rewards for spending as well as perceived clout with reservation based services (hotel, car rental, etc).   (more…)

After I presented at the SMC- Greenville meeting I was approached by a college student and asked an interesting question, “what’s the best background to get into a social media job?”  at the time, I mentioned that my background was business and marketing, so I could speak to that but not social media in general.  I decided to tweet the question since I knew I’d get quite the mixture of answers. Here are a few responses, each with a different viewpoint – technology entrepreneur, marketing consultant and in house technologist.  (All who are worth a follow by the way).

from @jpatrickhunt trial by fire. on the job training. offer your services for nothing and dive in. learn and adapt. you will be assimilated.

from @jfloyd journalism, photography, video production, advertising, english, web design…what does Seth call it…a multipationalist?

from @BJ_Emerson Great question, may depend on the needs of the org. My opinion: Don’t skimp on the tech skills, be good at relationships.

I expected the answers to be all over and I wasn’t disappointed.  So where does this leave us?  Ultimately while a background in in PR or marketing has an upside, I’m going to go out on a limb and say I don’t think it really matters for hiring.  To be clear, one should have some manner of understanding of the basics of communication and if the job has a strategy component you’ll need to understand the social landscape.  But what matters the most is that you be customer focused. Which may seem to be a no brainer to some of you, however it’s not to everyone.  Customer focused means thinking of yourself as the advocate of the people your organization exists to serve.  So you are approaching problems with the mindset of it you were the end user.

This is important because at the end of the day, social media is about people.  It’s a set of tools that are allowing customers the ability to connect with and give feedback to their friends and the public – and we as organizations have the ability to be part of that exchange.  To learn and respond and share. If you want to work in social media, you’ll be well on your way if you can be that voice of the customer.

Online involvement has been on my mind recently, specifically the idea of a “unified online presence” to which you may be thinking “What?!” So let me explain, I’ve had the term in my brain for a bit so I figured I picked it up from this guy, or this guy – but a search reveals that there is not much out there really (side note: a search for “unified online identity” does have a result set that is branding based, but still not the definition I’m seeking).

Since I can’t find it, I’ll define “unified online presence” as the intentional effort to coordinate and connect accounts of an entity in such a way that they communicate a similar message (if not the exact same message) to strengthen involvement and identity in those communities.

I’ve believe that a unified online presence was the way to be involved online.  And from the reading I do, I believe a lot of people feel the same.  When I say a lot, I really mean a lot of the blogs I read, which are mostly about marketing with a tech emphasis – and as you know one of the tenets of marketing is focused messaging so that doesn’t surprise me.

A real world example of this messaging is having twitter tied to facebook so that what I say on Twitter makes it look like I’m saying it to facebook or tying my Flickr into facebook so my friends can see what I’ve posted there instead of on facebook.  It could also be as simple as using the same profile pic (aka avatar) for all the communities you’re part of online.  These actions allow us to seamlessly operate in multiple-communities and efficiently amplify our web persona which is great…right?

I’m starting to believe that a unified online presence is great for marketing, isn’t always great for using the tools to engage with each of the communities.  Fred Wilson posted recently (@fredwilson) on how he has changed his use of facebook and twitter, which sparked this post after I read it.

First he made this move:

So I decided to do something pretty radical. I deleted about 300 “friends” on Facebook yesterday and took my total friend count down to 56. I’ve limited my Facebook friends to family and close friends. My methodology is something akin to who I’d invite to a family wedding or bar/bat mitzvah. I realize that a lot of the 300 people I nuked were using Facebook to follow me and they can no longer do that.

And this is why:

My reasoning was as follows: I feel that between Twitter, this blog, and my tumblog at fredwilson.vc, there are plenty of public places on the web that you can follow me and all of them have RSS feeds for those who want the content pushed to them. I feel that Facebook is by default private and it’s become a good place for me to network with my close friends and family privately.

I see the value in this intentional use of the platforms.  The audiences are by nature a big venn diagram of those involved with twitter and those friends/family on facebook of which there is minimal crossover.  They are quite distance, Twitter is an open and searchable platform where my every word is sucked into Google and made public, while facebook on the other hand is closed and only open to those I’ve selected as friends.

Fred’s decisions actually remind me of a conversation I had in college.  I walked in my friend Tosh’s dorm room and he said something to the effect of “bro if you hadn’t IM’d me today I would have taken you off my buddy list” which was a bit of a shocker. (Now please keep in mind at my college everyone had tons of AIM buddies, because it was how we checked in with what our friends were watching, eating, feeling, and listening to without talking to them and a really easy way to round up people to play campus golf.)  So I asked Tosh, “why would you have removed me” and he said, “because I’m removing anyone that hasn’t IM’d me in the last 2 weeks.” Which blew me away at the time.  But now I see the strength in that path, he was essentially making the intentional choice to pare down his buddy list to those he actually communicated with.

This is not too far off from what Fred has done. He’s made a choice to separate who is in each community and how/what he communicates each one distinctly.  He’s chosen the path that each account is a separate community.  That path blows away the notion of a unified online presence, but I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t on the fence about what to do. While a unified viewpoint looks at all the various accounts as one big online community.  I think Fred has it right because they are distinct and separate but I think personal branding is important and should be done which leaves me with a conundrum.  I can see strengths and weakness of each path but I’m not to a decision point…. yet.

I know you guys have great ideas, so what about you?  What have you done? Would you change?

Pictures from Adiumx.com and Facebook.com

I was in a gas station driving up to Pennsylvania last week and I saw the sign below.

My first thought was, “wow what horrible presentation, don’t they know that if they did, X, Y, and Z it could be so much better” However, as I thought about it I realized how wrong I was on multiple fronts. First, I was wrong because it’s fully functional. Now of course it could have a bit more appeal, but the sign does what it needs to do. It tells me that Gold Peak tea is .99. Before I walked in I did not know that the tea was .99 and because it’s clearly stated and easily seen, 3 steps in the door and I’m fully aware of that pricing.

Secondly, this made me think about the marketing/communication we do in a larger context. How often do we create a mountain, when a mole-hill would have worked? I know I often create relatively layered messaging, or features for Abunga because I want to show prowess rather than creating a simple design that communicates the message clearly, quickly and easily. In the end, it’s not about me, it’s about the user, the customer and if I give them what works for them best, they’ll probably come back.

How can you simplify what you are doing today? What features can you remove? What words can you cut?