Living in a 140 Character World

I always make a point to stop and read a piece that analyzes success versus failure – ie. Why this worked or this person made it, versus why this bombed or this person failed.

It’s usually the same stuff and reinforces the basics (work hard, have a strategy, follow through, etc.)

That’s why this piece I stumbled upon by Davey Kestens about his Go-Getter theory is an excellent read.

People who get stuff done strive for “good enough” and go on to the next. Quit being a perfectionist…

Didn’t see that coming!  How refreshing …

His premise is that perfectionists move slowly through the evolution cycle (being sure to get everything just right) … and eventually lose site of the cycle:  Meaning they get no where.

Kestens also addressees an obstacle that I see often while working with small business owners:  Failure to delegate.

Many of my clients fear that their subordinates won’t do it the way they would (perfectionist).  Kestens argues that true Go-Getters love what they do, and delegate the rest.

Details are important … but they can sure bog us down!

If you love to run the bakery … do you need to bake the pies?  Not if you want the business to grow.

My only counter thought was that of Steve Jobs.  But the more I thought about it, Steve does focus on the part he loves (tech land) and let’s others manager the rest of Apple.  I’m guessing he has the system all laid out that meets his vision – but I don’t see him figuring out which songs belong in iTunes.

The guy who wrote this piece is a 20-something entrepreneur … too young for some to take seriusly (aren’t all motivational speakers 45 going on 60?).

I think it’s right-on.

Since 7th grade history class, I have know that those who don’t learn from history, are condemned to repeat it.

In business, when bigger than life brand names come crashing down … do we learn from their fall?

AOL … Netscape … Is MySpace there yet?

MySpace isn’t totally down yet – despite the fact that News Corp has all but thrown in the towel.

MSNBC has a great piece on the fall on MySpace – one we can all learn from.

When a big name goes down, it is usually at the hands of the challenger.  In Myspace’s case it was Facebook.  The piece talks about the turning point – being FB founder Mark Zuckerberg’s non Wall Street style:

Zuckerberg’s great strength, say his one-time rivals from Myspace, was that he and his team were focused on product development and innovation while Myspace had become too concerned with revenue and meeting traffic targets

Facebook was about content.  MySpace was about quarterly results.

Social Media isn’t corporate.  Even the great brands that are on FB know that.

I’m starting to think that the beginning of the end for any New Media entity is the moment Wall Street comes calling.

Seems like you’ve got to be Steve Jobs to make Wall Street & New Media click.  Maybe it’s because he tells Wall Street to leave if they don’t like what he’s doing.

Now we have to watch Apple as they gear up for the post-Jobs era.

From MVP employee … to out of a gig in 18 months.

It can happen.

A client of mine is struggling with a problem I have weathered several times in my management career.

I call it BOTB … or “Best of the Bunch” dilemma.

My client took over a struggling business but was fortunate to have one solid person on that staff who held it together while we were making the necessary changes.  He knew the systems, the market and who to call to get what we needed.  My client immediately promoted him to director of operations  - and he truly held the office together while we got back on track.

** Jump ahead 18 Months **

We are more than back on track:  We’re flowing some cash and talking about the future.  We were able to attract solid people and think we have identified a strong area of growth for the company.  One staff member in particular likes the fact that my client isn’t all “corporate” and has energized the entrepreneurial spirit in everyone … well almost everyone.

Our dilemma is with our once “steady Eddy.”

Back when our standards were rooted in basic competence, he was our MVP.

He is a loyal company guy and loves coming to work.  But as our standards have now risen beyond competence, we don’t need to be held together:  we need to managers who will grow.

The consensus is that he doesn’t have it.

Ironically – his one time strength (brilliant at the basics) is now a weakness.

He is willing to learn anything we ask him, but can’t seem to do more than exactly what he is taught.

The company won’t grow if the key people don’t have the vision.

The difficult part is that he will do anything we ask – and cheerfully.  He just doesn’t know how to go further on his own (probably why he worked for the previous owner for so long while the company was in shambles).

As the consultant, I have to point out that we won’t achieve our goals with him managing the operation.

But I also know that he has a family and has been as loyal as the day is long.

There is no way to tactfully demote him – as the positions under him are niche specialists.

** Jump ahead to this month’s market call **

My client decided to end his employment.  Someone else was promoted to director of operations and has started to move the needle already.

This really hit home at first.

My client and I both left the faceless corporate world – so this was a difficult decision for both of us.  Our departing employee was given a generous severance package and I understand he has already found something else.

But I also understand that he is bitter and clueless as to why we let him go.

He thinks that he was our MVP because he would do anything we asked,  showed up early and stayed until it was all done … etc.

All true.

But in today’s dynamic business world – those are the basics:  the minimum expectation we have.

Promoting from within is like picking fruit.

If all the bananas are green, it’s tempting to grab just the yellowest looking one … never knowing if it will ripen.

A question on Twitter grabbed my attention:

What is the most important metric for a new business to follow?

I was expecting debt, margins, growth … you know the usuals.  That’s why the answer in Quicksprout caught my attention:

Engagement is the most important metric for a new company to measure because if your potential customers are engaged then there are multiple ways you can monetize them.

Yes!  Yea!

Is it me, or is that the coolest metric ever?

So simple … so true … so much the mantra for the 140 Character World.

This may not be what your bank or investment group is looking for … but it makes SO much sense that it’s got to be true.

James Poniewozik piece in today’s TIME offers a glimpse into the future of television content.

He is sharing news of Netflix acquiring it’s first ever original drama series … asking:

Why do you watch TV networks at all? You don’t go to the movie listings and say, “Gee, I wonder what Paramount has showing this week!”—you just look for a movie. The reason for TV’s configuration was, first, technical and practical. A network controlled the means of distribution: it had the hardware and the system of affiliates that were necessary to literally beam a program from a tape somewhere into your living room.

If you were starting a whole new society today, one has to wonder if TV, newspaper or radio would be part of the launch?  As a reference to content – maybe.  But not via printing presses, transmitters or 1000′ towers.

This could lead to even more interesting content of the future.

If your favorite show is cancelled … would you subscribe to new episodes delivered via NetFix?

Think of the times fan letters led to a series coming back – but usually for a short peroid because none of the letters came from Nielson homes.

In the 140 Character World – we can all be Nielson homes … and vote with a credit card.

Think about it … a television network is only an aggregation of third party content … just like Netflix

Soon:

• Local TV will be local
• Programming will be even more niched
• The “network” model will fade.  Current networks can produce programming if they want to stay relevant.
• We can vote for what we want to see with our credit cards.

I can’t wait!

I have worked with recording artists and record labels since 1990.  During that time, I don’t ever remember getting an apology letter from an artist about a song … until now.

Country singer Trace Adkins – who’s discography contains everything from the heartfelt You’re Gonna Miss This to Honky Tonk Badonk (a song about a lady’s rear end) – sent country radio programmers a letter of apology for his first single release of 2011.

Wondering:  Is it genuine … or clever 2011 marketing?

• Trace seem like a genuine guy, but not one to make excuses (or apologize for his content)
• 21st Century Marketing is fueled by transparency
• The first thing we did after opening this letter, was find the next song and listen.

BACKSTORY

Trace released Brown Chicken Brown Cow early in 2011.  Most in radio panned it as awful (present company included).  Beyond the porn theme, it was just a bad song.  It got very little radio airplay and even his fans were stunned.

With the next single’s heartfelt theme (Just Fishin‘ – a song about spending time with his daughter), his people didn’t waste any time and also panned BCBC.  Trace made an appearance in Nashville and apologized to country radio, then sent us all a follow-up letter and moved on.

It worked …

Everyone is juiced about the next song.

Again … IT WORKED.

So I’m trying to figure out … was it Trace being genuine, or his PR firm with a brilliant retreat and new launch?

It may have been a bit on the insensitive side, but it made sense.

I heard someone today call the Japanese tragedy the first “YouTube” disaster.

Great piece in Toronto Life from a frustrated media consumer who isn’t stealing copywrited material because he can’t afford to pay legitimately.

He’s just frustrated with the content gatekeepers and their crappy service, delayed releases and poor quality.

When he says he’d pay more – and to the proper people – if they would make it this easy, he sounds genuine.  Content thieves today are not of the same breed as the Napster underground of the 1990′s.

They will pay for content … but don’t want corporate BS.

The author spoke with someone at Rogers Media who seemed indifferent:

People want to have one billing relationship with one player

That is something right out of a perceptual study … the same type of research that told Coke to change into Pepsi in the mid 80′s.

Rogers is a pretty hip company – really.  To see them this out of touch with the 140 Character World is discouraging.