In the interests of simplicity — because after all that is the subject of this blog — I’ve moved to a self-hosted wordpress.org site. My short time here generated more than 14,000 visitors, and I’ve given up both my Google visibility and a lot of traffic (in the short term, I hope) with this move but I thought it made more sense to consolidate my business site (which was getting very little traffic) with my blog, which was getting traffic but wasn’t generating business and put them together in a place where I could do affiliate marketing, enhance my personal branding, and do a number of other things.
I invite you to come visit me at the new home of Bulldog Simplicity, hosted by Host Gator.
Last week, I took my family to the Late Renoir exhibit at the Philadelphia Museum of Art and smiled at Renoir’s description of his work as “simplicity bordering on severity,” thinking that the notion of Bulldog Simplicity has been around for a long time. Then yesterday, I was cleaning out some files and came across an Apple ad in the New York Times from September 29, 1997. A former co-worker had sent it to me with a note, “I thought of you.”
As I’ve struggled with communicating a brand that carries with it a certain ability to turn off some prospective clients, both the Renoir quote and this ad seem to capture a certain attitude I’ve carried throughout my career. Perhaps more important, the ad feels like a “call to action” to be remarkable. And to be aggressive about communicating what differentiates you from the pack.
I’m not going to try to recreate the layout, but here is the copy (the italics are mine):
To the crazy ones.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently.
They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them, disbelieve them, glorify them or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.
Because they change things. They invent. They imagine. They heal. They explore. They create. They inspire. They push the human race forward.
Maybe they have to be crazy. How else can you stare at an empty canvas and see a work of art? Or sit in silence and hear a song that’s never been written. Or gaze at a red planet and see a laboratory on wheels?
We make tools for these kinds of people. Because while some see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
And it’s the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, who actually do.
The point is, I see a lot of LinkedIn profiles, a lot of blogs, and a lot of websites that fail to capture — or celebrate — what makes someone special. Perhaps it is fear that being different as a first impression will cost them chances with a new client or employer. I have to admit I’m guilty of that at times, and I’m spending time taking another look at some of my materials.
When was the last time you revisited your public persona? Are you communicating the person you are or you think people want you to be?
Side note: If you feel you need help beefing up your branding materials, please drop me a note at email@example.com or go to this page on my website.
You’ll recall Mark Twain apologizing for the length of a letter, saying he’d have made it shorter if he had had more time.
Well, I recently started Tweeting as part of my new Consultant Launch Pad site (if you’re interested in following me, I’m @consultantlaunc) and it’s helping me think more about my messages. I’ve found that 140 characters isn’t all that much to express an idea (even if you’re just tweeting a quote or a link to another article or blog post), but if you want your message to get forwarded, you need to take that character count down below 120. That’s because a “retweet” also includes the name of the person forwarding it and that 120 characters needs to be even shorter if you want to give them space to make a short comment.
You’ll get a pretty good idea of how good or bad you are at communicating your message succinctly by the number of retweets and/or the number of people following you. One way to practice is to Follow a number of people and enter into a dialogue with them.
Tip No. 2 has to do with a new book out on the elevator speech called The Mirror Test by Jeffrey Hayzlett, Kodak’s former chief marketing officer. For now, I’ll point you toward an interview with and a mini-profile of him (they’re both short) but think his concept of what he calls “the 118” is pretty actionable.
Here’s an excerpt: “The 118 comes from the 118 seconds you actually have to pitch: 8 seconds to hook me and up to 110 seconds to drive it home — less than two minutes with only seconds to spare. The first eight seconds is the length of time the average human can concentrate on something and not lose some focus. It is also the length of time of one of the toughest rides in the world: a qualified ride in professional bull riding. In these first eight seconds, you must be compelling, strong, and focused to be successful. You must hold on as one of the meanest, toughest animals in the world tries to throw you off – just like any good prospect will. Make it those 8 seconds, and I’ll give you 110 more to drive your message home with no bull. But if you have not sold me at the end of the 118, I will start to tune out. At that point, we are moving forward to a sale or not.”
To summarize today’s two tips for a Twitter world: 2 Simplicity tips: Keep your Tweeting <120 charact and buy Jeffrey Hayzlett’s The Mirror Test.
And after attaching a TinyURL of this post, that’s 120 characters. On the nose.
One of the great challenges in business communications is making a computer-generated letter sound personal and still achieve its goal. It’s not easy to make a collection letter feel like it was written to an individual, to walk a line between friendly and firm and recognize that many of the recipients are embarrassed to be getting letters like that. I was asked to do that a few years ago, overseeing a project where we rewrote more than 700 letters of various intents to credit-card customers.
Despite positive feedback, we were told to change them back a few months later because many of our internal constituencies didn’t think friendly and empathetic was the right approach. Sigh.
That’s why I particularly liked this Ted talk from branding pioneer Alan Siegel, whose corporate tagline is Simple is Smart. In this speech, Siegel describes simplicity as “a means to achieving clarity, transparency, and empathy, building humanity into communications.” And he practices what he preaches…delivering a speech for what is normally a 15-to-20-minute time slot into just over four minutes.
Siegel is behind the YMCA’s new rebranding strategy, changing the name to “the Y” to reflect the nickname everyone has used for generations, although somewhat inexplicably, the Y is asking newspaper editors to refer to individual branches by the old name (e.g., the YMCA of New York City). This could be described as a “Twitter strategy,” where companies like National Public Radio and Kentucky Fried Chicken have now become NPR and KFC to fit into what some analysts describe as “a bite-size space.”
Siegel’s message is simple, yet few have embraced it. What can you do in your daily actions to make clarity, transparency, and empathy into a national priority? How can you overcome the barriers that the lawyers and the politicians often put in place to make that goal such a challenge?
I’m in a terrific new program that networking guru Keith Ferrazzi (Never Eat Alone, Who’s Got Your Back) is running and a recent exercise asked participants to describe ways they’ve kept their teams (and themselves) accountable. My submission got some positive feedback and it’s pretty simple, so I thought I’d share it.
I had a team of account executives in remote offices, each of whom managed a number of alumni-association partners. We weren’t always their highest priority so executing on a long list of initiatives wasn’t always easy. I started a 20-minute Daily Huddle (first thing in the AM-if you couldn’t make it, no problem) and gave each person two minutes to list their biggest accomplishment of the previous day, what they wanted to accomplish that day, and what they needed from me or someone else on the call. I kept track of what each person wanted to accomplish and asked the next day (and for a number of days after, if need be) what was getting in the way of completing that task. One benefit of the daily call was that other team members often offered advice based on having dealt with a similar problem with another school and very often someone would volunteer to role-play or help in some way to get the goal accomplished. In addition, having to outline your goals in front of others led to more tangible goals that would have a real impact on the team’s results.
As a result of this and some other execution-focused initiatives, we renewed 100+ relationships (with no losses), protecting $250 million in revenues and significantly reducing the sponsorship fees we were paying, while increasing group-satisfaction scores by 20%. We also surpassed our goals for launching our Affinity Checking product by 200% (endorsements and accounts). All because we spent a little bit of time every day focusing on initiatives that would move the needle.
Interestingly, someone in the class responded to my submission with the observation that people probably worked that much harder to complete tasks and come up with good objectives for the day because they didn’t want theirs to pale by comparison to other team members. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but it’s probably true
To be effective: Keep it short. Keep it focused. And try to have it at the same time every day — first thing in the AM.
How do you help your teams — or yourself — be more accountable and execute more effectively. Please share!
By the way, we’re getting some great traffic to our new website, Consultant Launch Pad, which is helping people decide whether consulting is a viable new career path and then helping them be successful if it is…Consulting/Project work is also a great way to generate short-term income if you’re one of the long-term unemployed or Over 50s who are having challenges finding a new position. Come check us out.
First, I apologize for my absence over the past three weeks. I’ve been building a new website, Consultant Launch Pad, which is designed to help new consultants and people whose job searches may be at a point where they have to think about alternatives to pay the mortgage. We have a lot of resources on the site to help you make your decision, set up your business, and get customers. I invite you to come take a look. Let us know what you think, suggest resources we don’t currently have, and join the Forum and ask — or answer some questions. I think you’ll particularly like the 30 Second Launch Pad feature.
I’m one of those people who believes that if you hear a good idea from three different sources, it’s probably worth paying attention to. Today’s idea is Limit Choice.
It started with coming across Groupon, which is one of those businesses where customers are a great deal on a single item. The deal depends on either a certain number of people taking it or it’s there until the supply runs out. I signed up and while I haven’t bought anything yet, it’s true that the deals are great and I anticipate I will participate before too long.
A few days later I was listening to an interview where Gary Vaynerchuk, the author of “Crush It,” was offering some advice to start-ups. He’s a bit over-the-top, but one of his pieces of advice had to do with simplicity and limiting choice. Gary was talking about how he had tested the “Groupon” model in one of retail wine story by replacing a rack near the front that held 10 bargain wines with just one. The result? “We’re crushing it,’ he said. “We’re selling these bottles at a staggering rate, one that trumps residual loss of not selling many products in that space.”
All this reminded me of one of the key “rules” we followed when offering credit-cards through the mail in a previous life. We tested everything and inevitably found that Choice Suppresses. The more variations on a card offer — different designs, different pricing, different value propositions — the fewer responses we received.
The reality is that people are overwhelmed these days. We bring a lot of that on ourselves — travel teams, dance classes, and the like — but at some point businesses decided we needed more and more choices. So that’s why today I can walk into a store and find razor blades with four, five, and even more blades when one can really do the trick (at a fraction of the price).
Think about places where you might be offering excessive choice to customers and what impact that might be having on their buying decision. Are there opportunities to reduce the choice — perhaps by careful targeting of benefits — and actually increase response?
Have you read anything that clearly explains what the heck British Petroleum was using to implement its failed Top Kill strategy?
Here’s how the New York Times described the material being used to force-feed mud down the throat of the blown-out well: “The mud has been ‘weighted up’ by adding dense powdered minerals so that it weighs 16.4 pounds per gallon. Additives have been mixed in to improve the flow and prevent the formation of icelike structures of gas and water called hydrates.”
To the reporter’s credit, he did describe it in the lead of his article as having “the consistency of a half-melted milkshake,” which actually isn’t too bad.
You can often simplify difficult-to-explain concepts by channeling how a teacher might explain it to a classroom of kids. Authors Chip and Dan Heath (Made to Stick) urge presenters to be Concrete and use Stories (or in this case, Visuals). As the Heaths point out, a sticky idea is understood, it’s remembered, and it changes something. The half-melted milkshake analogy may hit one or two of those standards; Bill Nye hits all three once he sets the stage for what the mud does. He went far enough to make his explanation Concrete, and therefore sticky.
Maybe this points to the inherent disadvantage the print media has against the electronic media, but you have the same advantages in a conference room or in front of an audience.
What kind of examples or visuals have you used to explain something more complex?