As the number and range of e-devices increases, the strategies to reach potential customers with relevant information and offers hots up. E-marketing is at the forefront here analysing how people relate to information, predicting the trends in use, and trying out new ways to entice positive reactions from people. Marketing is driven by statistics and analytics and we should be grateful for their analysis. However, traditionally iMedia companies groan when marketing departments get in on the briefs for new products. They are demanding, no doubt about it.
If we understand where they are coming from, it'll make it easier to work with them. So, what's happening?
Marketing efforts for mobile, smart-devices and digital display are increasing in line with increasing ownership. Furthermore, more online video is a trend. This move away from traditional TV ads and transferring digital display budget to online video was a key finding of a recent report into European Digital Video Output by Adap.tv and Admonsters.
But, the biggest problem for such migration of use seems to lie in the lack of the tools for planning and measurement for such campaigns. Sounds like an opportunity for someone? Because, as we say, marketing is driven by stats and analytics, this shouldn't surprise us.
People appear to be spending less time on sites before they buy: almost two minutes less than last year. This means they want fast, efficient, transparent sites. They reject anything else as wasting their time, so be warned. Added to that, with the range and number of devices increasing, as well as the willingness to buy from mobile sources, it's not just web sites that have to be well designed and efficient or sales will be lost.
It might surprise you to find that revising your tag words for your sites can be more effective than you'd think. That's the gist of an analysis of shopping trends from Mother's Day (March 10th). Were you one of the online buyers? Has your own behaviour changed? Are you monitoring your own evolving strategies for online use within your company? You should be ahead of the general game and predict trends. See: 10 online shopping trends for Mother's Day from Netmarketing (March 7th).
For the bigger e-marketing picture, see what you think is coming true from the analysts' 2013 overview of trends they predicted in December 2012. There's quite a variety that'll tease the little grey cells. See: Inspired Marketing Predictions for 2013
Tuesday, 26 March 2013
Friday, 15 March 2013
Project Responsibility Matrix - growing in importance
Just in case you need a refresh, a responsibility matrix is a tool used in general project management and is useful in iMedia project management especially when there are multiple projects with many people overlapping the tasks they have to perform. It can become confusing knowing who you are responsible to, who has the authority to vary your time allocation on projects and who is accountable for what. So if any of these aspects strike a chord with you, you might well benefit from drawing up a responsibility matrix for your project (especially if you are the project manager), or, asking your project manager to draw one up to help all of you if you are a team member.
If you need a template to help you, see the one that is in our book (MS Word format), Managing Interactive Media, Page 68, or, do a Google search for responsibility matrix template and choose one that will suit your needs. The project template attached is more for a project level. You might need a RACI Matrix where accountability for management functions at company level is more of a focus. You can search our blog here for more on RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed).
It isn't easy achieving this matrix and you may meet resentment. It might help for you to understand what might lie behind this negativity. Accountability and responsibility for results have been equated with finger pointing (blame) if and when things go wrong. It's no wonder people shy away from accepting them. Kevan Hall describes the blame culture in Hannah Prevett's Sunday Times article (17.3.13). This negativity is easy to understand but not easy to overcome. You'll need all your negotiation powers to arrive at a solution especially if people have seen negative results in your organisation for accepting accountability and responsibility. Kevan suggests balancing a negative culture with a positive one where success is celebrated. Often successful projects are just accepted rather than celebrated. Is that true for you?
The importance of your ability to influence those around and above you is highlighted by Tristan Wember in the Leadership Thoughts blog (mid February 2013). He gives some sound advice and demonstrates what can go wrong in his case study if you use a threat/blame culture.
Well then, is using responsibility matrix growing in importance? It would appear so. Many job descriptions for management positions, especially Project Managers, are mentioning the use of these matrices/processes as a skill that is wanted. This includes iMedia Project management positions. It is good to note that there is more parity between the older team leader concept used in emerging iMedia companies and general project management now. As a confirmation, take a look at aamanyire’s article, in ProjectSmart, Competencies Every Project Manager Should Have (25.2.13). The responsibility matrix is mentioned under processes and people skills. It's nice to have it located in the other skills you need as an iMedia Project manager too.
This description may well serve you as confirmation of the importance of your role and one that is at management level, particularly if you have an annual review - as long as you are covered for the other skills too.
If you need a template to help you, see the one that is in our book (MS Word format), Managing Interactive Media, Page 68, or, do a Google search for responsibility matrix template and choose one that will suit your needs. The project template attached is more for a project level. You might need a RACI Matrix where accountability for management functions at company level is more of a focus. You can search our blog here for more on RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed).
It isn't easy achieving this matrix and you may meet resentment. It might help for you to understand what might lie behind this negativity. Accountability and responsibility for results have been equated with finger pointing (blame) if and when things go wrong. It's no wonder people shy away from accepting them. Kevan Hall describes the blame culture in Hannah Prevett's Sunday Times article (17.3.13). This negativity is easy to understand but not easy to overcome. You'll need all your negotiation powers to arrive at a solution especially if people have seen negative results in your organisation for accepting accountability and responsibility. Kevan suggests balancing a negative culture with a positive one where success is celebrated. Often successful projects are just accepted rather than celebrated. Is that true for you?
The importance of your ability to influence those around and above you is highlighted by Tristan Wember in the Leadership Thoughts blog (mid February 2013). He gives some sound advice and demonstrates what can go wrong in his case study if you use a threat/blame culture.
Well then, is using responsibility matrix growing in importance? It would appear so. Many job descriptions for management positions, especially Project Managers, are mentioning the use of these matrices/processes as a skill that is wanted. This includes iMedia Project management positions. It is good to note that there is more parity between the older team leader concept used in emerging iMedia companies and general project management now. As a confirmation, take a look at aamanyire’s article, in ProjectSmart, Competencies Every Project Manager Should Have (25.2.13). The responsibility matrix is mentioned under processes and people skills. It's nice to have it located in the other skills you need as an iMedia Project manager too.
This description may well serve you as confirmation of the importance of your role and one that is at management level, particularly if you have an annual review - as long as you are covered for the other skills too.
Friday, 8 March 2013
Networking on networking
It seems games have to be networked these days. You've probably heard that EA have had problems with the latest version of SimCity which led to Amazon temporarily suspending sales of the game. Heavy use of the servers to which the game had to be connected (always) were to blame.
Getting more traffic than you bargained for is not uncommon in setting up networks. It's got more of a problem as people's files have got larger and the halcyon days when we could hold our life on a 100 megabyte disc (that cost several hundred pounds!) are long gone. However, setting up our new network here at ATSF Towers with a new router after our recent move taught me a completely different lesson about networks to do with addressing,and what you could learn by sharing knowledge on the network.
The forum for my sharing experience was the estimable MacInTouch, which I have mentioned before. The problem I had is explained (by me) on their Help Please page, although in this case I was the one offering to help anyone who had suffered the same frustration I had with IP addresses on your local network. In brief, my devices had bad trouble connecting to the network and it turned out to be a somewhat esoteric problem with how my router gave out IP addresses.
I mention this here because a couple of the responses discussed addressing on virtual private networks. More and more companies now use VPN tunnels to connect a remote computer to the office network securely and as if the computer really was in the office. What I hadn't realised (because I'm not a VPN user) is that when a remote computer is on the office network it's sharing the office address space and you have to be careful that the addresses don't clash. This is all explained in the MacInTouch discussion linked to above, so I won't go into it here.
Since the network configurations for even your smart phones have to fit into this space it is worth knowing a little about how it works ... or making sure someone in your office knows.
Getting more traffic than you bargained for is not uncommon in setting up networks. It's got more of a problem as people's files have got larger and the halcyon days when we could hold our life on a 100 megabyte disc (that cost several hundred pounds!) are long gone. However, setting up our new network here at ATSF Towers with a new router after our recent move taught me a completely different lesson about networks to do with addressing,and what you could learn by sharing knowledge on the network.
The forum for my sharing experience was the estimable MacInTouch, which I have mentioned before. The problem I had is explained (by me) on their Help Please page, although in this case I was the one offering to help anyone who had suffered the same frustration I had with IP addresses on your local network. In brief, my devices had bad trouble connecting to the network and it turned out to be a somewhat esoteric problem with how my router gave out IP addresses.
I mention this here because a couple of the responses discussed addressing on virtual private networks. More and more companies now use VPN tunnels to connect a remote computer to the office network securely and as if the computer really was in the office. What I hadn't realised (because I'm not a VPN user) is that when a remote computer is on the office network it's sharing the office address space and you have to be careful that the addresses don't clash. This is all explained in the MacInTouch discussion linked to above, so I won't go into it here.
Since the network configurations for even your smart phones have to fit into this space it is worth knowing a little about how it works ... or making sure someone in your office knows.
Friday, 1 March 2013
Online project management resources: shared
Some of our readers would like to share resources they've found useful. Isn't that what blogging is all about?
The first relates to project management tools. See Squeezed Books: Online Guide to Project Management Resources.
The site gives a short review of several tools and how they can prove useful in projects. They range from cloud-based tools, open source, apps etc. and cover such software as : Zoho, Microsoft Project, Teamlab, Campfire, Basecamp, Huddle, Binfire, the jxProject, Dot Project, Task Juggler, Open Workbench, Gliffy, GQueues, gTrax, and Google Drive among others. Any of these ring a bell with you? Are you using them or others like them?
The second resource that's recommended is 10 Tips for Project Management Prosperity.
Although these are tips for general project management, you'll recognise their value. We major on all the aspects in this blog. Perhaps the Tip Number 9, Test Deliverables, seems to lean towards the older waterfall methodology of software development rather than the Agile approach, but the principle remains valid.
Many thanks to Stacy and her students. Anyone else like to share? We're listening.
The first relates to project management tools. See Squeezed Books: Online Guide to Project Management Resources.
The site gives a short review of several tools and how they can prove useful in projects. They range from cloud-based tools, open source, apps etc. and cover such software as : Zoho, Microsoft Project, Teamlab, Campfire, Basecamp, Huddle, Binfire, the jxProject, Dot Project, Task Juggler, Open Workbench, Gliffy, GQueues, gTrax, and Google Drive among others. Any of these ring a bell with you? Are you using them or others like them?
The second resource that's recommended is 10 Tips for Project Management Prosperity.
Although these are tips for general project management, you'll recognise their value. We major on all the aspects in this blog. Perhaps the Tip Number 9, Test Deliverables, seems to lean towards the older waterfall methodology of software development rather than the Agile approach, but the principle remains valid.
Many thanks to Stacy and her students. Anyone else like to share? We're listening.
Friday, 22 February 2013
Do you pray and spray in your pitch and tender processes?
For some of you, the pitch and tender process for winning business is someone else's problem - lucky you! For those in the agency end of the iMedia sector it's an established traditional way of winning business. But it has always been tricky.
Previously, we've asked you to establish how much you are spending on the pitch and tender process in your company . We've suggested a regular review of your success rate in winning and an appraisal of whether it is an appropriate use of your resources. We've suggested ways of tightening up your strategy to win. However, Graham Laing's blog, Tendering: You've already lost (29.1.13) is a brave wake-up call for us all. It could be invaluable for you to take note of what he suggests as a revised strategy, particularly as resources are stretched thinly in this economic climate.
Graham suggests seven scenarios for you to apply, asking yourself if the pitch is already lost before you enter the process. Worth considering, don't you think?
Another scenario occurs if you are the incumbent developer but you feel that things between you and the client are 'going off the boil'. The ISBA (The voice of British advertisers) in their analysis of their Alternative Pitch Practices survey results suggest a No Pitch, Pitch where you present new ideas and perhaps new personnel to refresh your relationship with an existing client to show how you have developed as a company. Another neat idea, don't you think?
So, things are moving on the pitch and tender front. Keep an eye on it as it can work in your favour.
Previously, we've asked you to establish how much you are spending on the pitch and tender process in your company . We've suggested a regular review of your success rate in winning and an appraisal of whether it is an appropriate use of your resources. We've suggested ways of tightening up your strategy to win. However, Graham Laing's blog, Tendering: You've already lost (29.1.13) is a brave wake-up call for us all. It could be invaluable for you to take note of what he suggests as a revised strategy, particularly as resources are stretched thinly in this economic climate.
Graham suggests seven scenarios for you to apply, asking yourself if the pitch is already lost before you enter the process. Worth considering, don't you think?
Another scenario occurs if you are the incumbent developer but you feel that things between you and the client are 'going off the boil'. The ISBA (The voice of British advertisers) in their analysis of their Alternative Pitch Practices survey results suggest a No Pitch, Pitch where you present new ideas and perhaps new personnel to refresh your relationship with an existing client to show how you have developed as a company. Another neat idea, don't you think?
So, things are moving on the pitch and tender front. Keep an eye on it as it can work in your favour.
Monday, 11 February 2013
Copyright in software better defined
I've always understood that there is a difference between form and content. There is no intellectual property in the form and structure of a book but there is in the content of the book: the design of the cover and pages and the words and images it contains. In computing (and hence interactive media) this distinction is less clear cut because everything is 'made' of computer program and we tend to also talk of the form and function (what it looks like and what it does) of a program as well as any content that a user might produce using that program.
A recent decision by the UK High Court has clarified what is protected by copyright when it comes to a computer program. This follows from decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the late Lord Justice Pumfrey.
The case before the High Court was a battle between two software companies, SAS Institute Inc and World Programming Limited where SAS claimed that WPL, in reproducing the functionality of piece of software had infringed copyright.
The whole judgement makes for somewhat arcane reading but one key quote is this:
I must assume that programming language has the obvious meaning here: PHP, C++, Algol ... whatever the application was written in (in the case here it appears to be a bespoke language). The component parts of a computer language are words (albeit ones with very specific meanings) and it is up the the programmers how they use these words to tell the computer what to do. In this sense it is like a recipe written in English. The recipe might be copyright but the English language it uses is not. So the computer program is copyright (as a work of literature if nothing else) but the language is not (although it might have elements that could be patented as covered by this BBC news story). That seems sensible.
The file formats make an interesting case. Finding a linguistic analogy is tortuous but you could say that the format of a haiku is like a file format. If you write your poem in the appropriate way it is a haiku, otherwise it's not. However, that doesn't mean that anyone could claim copyright in the form of a haiku does it? If you're reverse engineering something such as a word processor then you need to be able to write files in the appropriate format; so this judgement clarifies that situation.
Funtionality takes us back to long-standing arguments about copying how a program works and what it does. The graphical and textual elements of an interface can be copyright if either is, as the judgement notes, "... its author's own intellectual creation...". This does not apply to the function: so we can broadly say that form (notably any graphical user interface) may be copyright but function can not be.
As it happens, the only thing that was infringed in this case was copyright in the user manuals, which is a literary work (presumably with a few illustrations) in any case so had to be a slam dunk.
See SCL and Field Fisher Waterhouse's Tech Bytes blog for more detail and the ruling itself for the literal chapter and verse ... and remember that I am not a lawyer and this blog does not constitute legal advice.
A recent decision by the UK High Court has clarified what is protected by copyright when it comes to a computer program. This follows from decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the late Lord Justice Pumfrey.
The case before the High Court was a battle between two software companies, SAS Institute Inc and World Programming Limited where SAS claimed that WPL, in reproducing the functionality of piece of software had infringed copyright.
The whole judgement makes for somewhat arcane reading but one key quote is this:
...copyright in a computer program does not protect either the programming language in which it is written or its interfaces (specifically, its data file formats) or its functionality from being copied.
I must assume that programming language has the obvious meaning here: PHP, C++, Algol ... whatever the application was written in (in the case here it appears to be a bespoke language). The component parts of a computer language are words (albeit ones with very specific meanings) and it is up the the programmers how they use these words to tell the computer what to do. In this sense it is like a recipe written in English. The recipe might be copyright but the English language it uses is not. So the computer program is copyright (as a work of literature if nothing else) but the language is not (although it might have elements that could be patented as covered by this BBC news story). That seems sensible.
The file formats make an interesting case. Finding a linguistic analogy is tortuous but you could say that the format of a haiku is like a file format. If you write your poem in the appropriate way it is a haiku, otherwise it's not. However, that doesn't mean that anyone could claim copyright in the form of a haiku does it? If you're reverse engineering something such as a word processor then you need to be able to write files in the appropriate format; so this judgement clarifies that situation.
Funtionality takes us back to long-standing arguments about copying how a program works and what it does. The graphical and textual elements of an interface can be copyright if either is, as the judgement notes, "... its author's own intellectual creation...". This does not apply to the function: so we can broadly say that form (notably any graphical user interface) may be copyright but function can not be.
As it happens, the only thing that was infringed in this case was copyright in the user manuals, which is a literary work (presumably with a few illustrations) in any case so had to be a slam dunk.
See SCL and Field Fisher Waterhouse's Tech Bytes blog for more detail and the ruling itself for the literal chapter and verse ... and remember that I am not a lawyer and this blog does not constitute legal advice.
Saturday, 26 January 2013
The present e-marketing perspective and its implications
Tablet-driven – that’s the trend for the next few years. It seems that the smart-phones that have dominated the market are due to give way to tablets. The pros for tablets are bigger screens, they offer more variety of use to consumers (watch videos more comfortably, access to web pages designed for them, buy online more easily etc.), better access to corporate data for employees on the move – among others.
The tablet market is hotting up as more companies are offering tablets and their price comes down. There’s a short, sweet summary of research, report highlights and trends in the Rippleeffect, Breakfast Waffle, blog (7.1.13)
And, this analysis is confirmed for the digital entertainment market by Jerome Rota, (10.1.13) in the Netimperative blog.
There’s a far more detailed report on Customer Loyalty and marketing strategy at The Loyalty Guide.com. Although the tablet frenzy is not explicitly noted, there are fascinating insights into changes in consumer behaviour, the value of brand in online ventures, and a ‘What the experts say’, section that consolidates sector information on: Supermarket and Grocery Loyalty, General Retail Loyalty, Financial Services Loyalty, Airlines FFPs and Airport Loyalty, Hotel and Resort Loyalty, General Travel and Tourism Loyalty, Food, Drink and Entertainments Loyalty, Mobile, Fixed Line and ISP Loyalty, Automotive and Fuel Loyalty, Media and Publishing Loyalty, and Loyalty in Other Sectors (mainly public service oriented).
Then we get an in-depth treatment of how e-marketing trends are likely to go in 2013 from Ashley Friedlien, e-consultancy (8.1.13). His 17 pointers offer a wide-ranging romp through aspects of the markets that he finds significant; digital mainstream - the ‘new norm’, digital talent – war, putting effort into cross-channel customer experiences, focus on the long-term rather than just short term, watch digital internationalisation in such uncertain financial times, customer choice for channels settling down, transparently knowing what customers want, content, content, content, mobile maturity including m-commerce, better understanding of the social media market, design and user experience influenced by screen size, native advertising versus other models, digital analysis improving across channels and types of user experience, emerging digital TV spin-offs, bettering email and SEO marketing through intelligence, among others.
So exciting times on the marketing front for 2013. It doesn’t take much to understand the impact across the board for everyone involved in digital. Commissioned products have to achieve business ends and these are dictated by customer needs while marketeers give us the insights between them - for those that are willing to listen.
The tablet market is hotting up as more companies are offering tablets and their price comes down. There’s a short, sweet summary of research, report highlights and trends in the Rippleeffect, Breakfast Waffle, blog (7.1.13)
And, this analysis is confirmed for the digital entertainment market by Jerome Rota, (10.1.13) in the Netimperative blog.
There’s a far more detailed report on Customer Loyalty and marketing strategy at The Loyalty Guide.com. Although the tablet frenzy is not explicitly noted, there are fascinating insights into changes in consumer behaviour, the value of brand in online ventures, and a ‘What the experts say’, section that consolidates sector information on: Supermarket and Grocery Loyalty, General Retail Loyalty, Financial Services Loyalty, Airlines FFPs and Airport Loyalty, Hotel and Resort Loyalty, General Travel and Tourism Loyalty, Food, Drink and Entertainments Loyalty, Mobile, Fixed Line and ISP Loyalty, Automotive and Fuel Loyalty, Media and Publishing Loyalty, and Loyalty in Other Sectors (mainly public service oriented).
Then we get an in-depth treatment of how e-marketing trends are likely to go in 2013 from Ashley Friedlien, e-consultancy (8.1.13). His 17 pointers offer a wide-ranging romp through aspects of the markets that he finds significant; digital mainstream - the ‘new norm’, digital talent – war, putting effort into cross-channel customer experiences, focus on the long-term rather than just short term, watch digital internationalisation in such uncertain financial times, customer choice for channels settling down, transparently knowing what customers want, content, content, content, mobile maturity including m-commerce, better understanding of the social media market, design and user experience influenced by screen size, native advertising versus other models, digital analysis improving across channels and types of user experience, emerging digital TV spin-offs, bettering email and SEO marketing through intelligence, among others.
So exciting times on the marketing front for 2013. It doesn’t take much to understand the impact across the board for everyone involved in digital. Commissioned products have to achieve business ends and these are dictated by customer needs while marketeers give us the insights between them - for those that are willing to listen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
