This isn’t because they aren’t using Amazon at work but because their employer hasn’t updated their internal applications in 10 years.

I get frequent requests to provide some sort of “private” Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn to large enterprises. Their goal is to provide some sort of social experience at work. They want to do this “in house” because of two reasons. One, they are afraid of the employees “wasting time” not interacting with their co-workers. And, two, they are worried about corporate data getting “out”.

Regarding the first objection, locking down the employee online experience isn’t going to prevent them from using their time as they choose. You can’t create rules that will create good employees. There are many more and much better ways to get employees to _want_ to behave appropriately. Moreover, these “new” social tools are not the only way an employee could squander company time. They already have lots of ways to do that, if they’d like.

As for the second objection, this reminds me of the early days of content management systems (CMS). A while back, companies would spend lots of time and money creating their own systems because off-the-shelf, customizable software wasn’t exactly right for them. In reality, they had different process, to be certain, but they were no better. Most enterprises seems to suffer from a “not invented here” syndrome regarding tools like that. And, so long as the implementation is left to technologists, they have a vested interest in keep things like this.

Regarding security of such social networks, they are no less or more secure than the average enterprise. It’s a mistake to think that, just because a tool is created in-house, it’s more secure. Indeed, it might even be less secure, because in-house technologists have to learn everything about the type of application all at once, and just for one application. They are unlikely to have the same skills as a technologist at a dedicated application provider.

Social media and networking can definitely benefit the average employee. And, I hope that companies will give the “standard” tools a chance before they start creating their own.

But, is there a way to enliven this process?

I’m not talking about team building exercises or issues meetings. I’m thinking about how we can enhance the information flow (both ways) so that the employee’s (work) life is better _and_ the company’s operations are improved.

Primitve examples of this sort of communication are sales force automation (SFA), customer relationship management (CRM), and (typically executive) dashboards. All these tools are slowly migrating across the enterprise as ways of sharing information. But, even if these tools were perfected and fully adopted (we’re not in danger of either of these events), I don’t think we’d have 10% of what’s needed to move operations to a new level.

In order to move operations to a new level, we need a dynamically adaptive communication system. Something like a _semantic intranet_. We have just in time, just in place logistics, why don’t we have that in information flow? And beyond mere delivery, why don’t we have just in time conversations? And just in time meetings?

Many of the barriers to this sort of thing are cultural. Many people dislike or even resist change.

There are also technology challenges. Implementing tools like this oftern require upgrading your infrastructure as well as your staff.

But, someone in your market isn’t resisting. Someone is adopting these tools and thus is outpacing you. And so this isn’t optional, if you want to not just survive but thrive in your market. Creating a free-flowing information infrastructure is the first step to exponential growth.

In the end, only results matter. Research is designed to increase the likelihood of success while cutting down the time to execute. Unfortunately, research often takes a lot of time and headache. And it’s often inconclusive, providing no clear tactical or strategic path.

It’s tempting to try to overcome this by (trying to) get better at research. But, I think this doesn’t work. All research is subject to doubt of some kind because it’s all hypothetical. There is no definitive research. There can’t be, because research is conducted before success can be measured.

Rather than lament these shortcomings of research, I suggest we give up on it as the primary means to improve results. Instead, I prefer quick launches with very robust measurement. This has the advantage of measuring reality, not some hypothetical audience target segment. With real measurement data, we can feed that back into the system and improve results.

In the end, I think that this approach will provide a much faster path to good results.

Recently, however, I have seen an increase in the synchronicity of social media. Twitter and Facebook now seem to demand, and receive, constant attention. Status updates get replies in real-time. Tweets are answered in seconds. This indicates that these media have become synchronous: the parties are in communication at the same time. And, in so doing, these media are losing their efficiency. As they lose their efficiency, they become more like work. That is, they demand more and more time from participants. And as this happens, we can expect the use of social media in the workplace to come under increased scrutiny, especially in this economy.

We have to be careful when considering why is it communication that we call social that we don’t relax in what’s on synchronist communication. Synchronist communication apparently risky because they have–require much higher commitment from both parties. Instead, be sure to focus also on a synchronist communication, in fact we’re underestimating the importance and the role of the e-mail.

Usually, when someone (marketing copywriters especially) puts adjectives in front of a noun, they are covering something up. These offenses take several forms.

• Redundancy—adding an adjective that repeats the meaning of the noun. I am provoked mainly by the adjective “smart,” as in “smart marketing.” Isn’t that just marketing? Isn’t all (real) marketing already smart? If that’s not bad enough, consider the case when you add another common word, “truly,” as in “truly smart marketing.” Yikes! Now it’s not just redundant. It sounds like you’re protesting too much. Why draw so much attention?
• Obviousness—adding an adjective that is already implicit. Here, I am thinking about terms like “great offer.” Why would you offer me something that’s not great?
• False excitement—adding terms that are designed to generate enthusiasm. The most common is “exciting,” as in “an exciting offer.” I don’t need your rah-rah adjectives (or participles, or whatever) to tell me if the offer is exciting or not. I can decide that myself based on the offer.

A great way to test if your adjectives or adverbs are problematic is to substitute their opposite (or at least a contrary) in the expression. If it sounds weird, then your original modifier wasn’t adding any information. If it sounds normal, then chances are your original term was helping. An example here is drawn from above: “a bad offer.” Who would offer something bad?  So, that means that “great” is useless. But, if you say “a limited-time offer,” then the opposite would be “a non-time-limited offer.” There are such kinds of offers, too, and knowing the difference is important. So, “limited-time” is acceptable. It’s actually clarifying what kind of offer you have.

The point of all this is to help you streamline and simplify your copy. Simple concepts and expressions are more powerful and get more results.

Using marketing automation is essential. But, which tools are most appropriate?

Good lead nurturing requires tracking the prospects activity. When activity happens offline, it becomes very difficult to track. Sure, you could have sales or marketing personnel enter data by hand, but this is expensive and unreliable. By far, the best choice is to use your Web site to perform this tracking.

A Web site can track individual activities. This means that you will know about all the touchpoints between your company and your prospect.

Note that your Web site is probably not already interesting in and of itself to perform this function. You will need to think of all your marketing efforts as leading somehow back to the Web site. And to do this effectively, you will need to be sure to have content related to problems and solutions, so that (eventually) you can go (back) and look at which of those the prospect was/is interested in.

With the advent of interactive communications such as email, online advertising, blogging, etc., print has taken it on the chin. Fewer clients request print and fewer agencies recommend print. Therefore, when engaging in a print project, you should look at the plethora of techniques available: emboss, spot varnish, custom bindery, metallic inks, laser cutting, synthetic paper, custom diecutting, etc. Don’t just use it because it’s there, but look for opportunities where the use of a non-standard printing technique fits the goals for the project and supports the strategy behind the creative.

One word of warning: overuse of these techniques could tread into tacky territory. They should be used sparingly and with great care.

On your next print project, take a step back to review all the different options that you can employ. If you are an agency, consult with your printer for ideas. If you are a client, ask your agency if additional print techniques could be used to push your strategy further.

The Masters has been around since 1934, so it’s a longstanding brand with a cherished history. How do they (and Augusta National Golf Club, where the tournament is played) protect this history? By keeping the Masters brand pure — free from distractions or affiliations with any other brands that may not have as great a reputation.

At the tournament, the Masters brand is front and center. Every available food item is Masters-branded (see the photo of the Masters crackers). You can order cola (which happens to be Coca-Cola), sports drink (which happens to be Powerade), or peanut butter crackers (Lance crackers). There are very few sponsorships of any kind, and the ones that are there are done very tastefully. You won’t see anyone handing out samples of chewing gum or headache powder.

At the Masters, it’s all about the golf and the history of the game.

How does this relate to you? Be careful how you promote your brand. Be careful of affiliations with your brand. It may not be realistic to completely isolate your brand in the same way the Masters has done, but there is something to be learned about the care with which they have protected theirs.

If it is necessary to link away from your site, be sure to a) have the link open in a new window so that your site remains live in an open window and b) bury the link if possible. In many cases, if your primary source of content is another web source (such as a news posting site), you can adjust your site to pull the content into your Web pages without showing your valued visitors the exit door.

Unless you are just looking to generate traffic or become a link farm, take the necessary steps to avoid becoming a trampoline site.