Remain Relevant in Changing Times

Networking online: enough already!

Happy New Year! Is one of your resolutions to get - and stay - better connected professionally and personally? If my in-box is any indication, a ton of people have made the same resolution. I've been flooded over the past couple of weeks with invitations to connect on www.LinkedIn.com, www.pulse.plaxo.com, www.twitter.com, and the usual Facebook and MySpace.com.

Here's my prediction for 2008: people who weren't early adopters of networking online will gravitate to some of the newer online tools like www.pulse.plaxo.com in an effort to be among the first to climb aboard the NBT (next big thing). These people will send countless invitations and start building big databases, but many will soon lose interest or move on to something else. Online networkers can be rather fickle...and irritating when they go about trying to link to as many people as they can, whether they know them or not.

Don't get me wrong: I love networking and am a huge fan of LinkedIn, as I've noted here before. But I'll be darned if I'm going to get connected with people through multiple systems, especially since (so far) everyone who has contacted me through Pulse and Twitter in particular are already connected to me elsewhere. I don't see the point. I have no desire to combine my personal and professional connections (supposedly the selling point of Plaxo). I can't imagine a time when I'll want to "Twitter" with people... I view it as being for people with too much time on their hands or an inflated view of how interesting daily life is (theirs or mine).

I think it makes a lot more sense to pick a professional networking system and a personal one and learn to use them really well so you can be efficient and effective. This business of being connected just to be connected misses the whole point of networking, which is PURPOSEFUL connection.

So, while I want to encourage anyone reading this to always keep in mind the importance of networking, I hope you'll give some thought to  putting a strategy behind it. Thoughts?

Is the Rolodex still relevant? Spinning for contacts can still trump the click of a mouse

Saturday's Wall Street Journal carried a fascinating story that addressed the question, "Whatever happened to the Rolodex?" (Subscription required). In a nutshell, the story featured several business professionals who still cling to their Rolodexes, despite living in a Blackberry world where it seems you aren't real if you aren't connected online or found in an Outlook Contacts listing.

The article made me smile because I, too, am one of those people who never throws away a business card. I put them in large ziplock bags and store them in a file cabinet drawer. I've been too embarrassed to keep them on a Rolodex, believing it would mark me as a dinosaur. Still, as much as I love technology and am good about keeping my key contacts filed electronically, there's a part of me that just knows one day there's going to be a huge technical glitch that causes me to have to rebuild from scratch.

Yes, I know half the cards will be out of date, but the point is I'll at least have names I can look up using other means. Besides, I like to look at business cards. I think they tell a lot about the person who gave it to me (unless they're from a large company that requires a standard card that emphasizes the brand over the person).

According to Newell Rubbermaid, makers of the Rolodex, the 6,000-card flip files of the past have given way to much smaller flip files; in fact, the largest one the company makes holds "only" 500 cards, a nod to the decreasing desktop space resulting from the surge in cubicles. But hey, despite the fact that these card wheels aren't exactly a growth industry, they also don't require frequent updating; hence, they're cash cows. The standard business card just hasn't changed much over the years in terms of size and shape.

Generally speaking, sales of card wheels have fallen steadily since the 80's when personal digital assistants (PDAs) first came on the scene. Now, companies that traditionally relied on card files and even card scanners are looking for ways to expand their brand and tools to the digital world, lest they go under altogether.

Meanwhile, Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn provide ample opportunities for us to keep up with one another electronically. I love and hate these tools equally: I love 'em because, used properly, they're powerful and undeniably easy to use; I hate them because they're so easy to use people tend to "collect people" with the click of the mouse without giving much thought to why the person is worth collecting. At least with a Rolodex, you have to make an effort to attach the card to the wheel, file it and even occasionally remove some if the file gets too unmanageable.

In our efforts to become as paperless as possible, I think we sometimes fail to recognize that "the old-fashioned way" can still be relevant. After all, the relevance isn't in the  way the information is filed: it's in how the information that's filed is used.

How do you keep up with your contacts?

Books on a cell phone: giving novels the finger - and thumbs!

I can't even imagine reading an entire novel on a cell phone screen, let alone write one. And yet, that's exactly what's happening in Japan, according to today's Wall Street Journal story, "In Japan, Novelists Find a New Medium." (subscription required)

It seems that the fiction market is enjoying a comeback of sorts, thanks to the ease with which novels can now be delivered right to the palm of your hand. Novelists are banging out their stories one key at a time, mostly using their thumbs. One featured novelist has already written eight books and has a loyal following that apparently appreciates her willingness to suffer through sore pinkies and broken blood vessels on their behalf.

Not surprisingly, readers are primarily teenage girls whose love for this entertainment-on-the-go is also influencing what books go to print ("Love Sky" sold more than 1.3 million hard copies!) and even to movie format.  In fact, one of the reasons the books are so popular is because they tap into the way young people often think - in movie scenes. That makes both writing them and reading them even easier for all involved.

And talk about getting instant feedback! Since the stories are usually written in chunks and delivered in almost-real-time, writers can get feedback that offers encouragement, or even suggest changes to the storyline. In other words, the novels themselves become more relevant even as they are being written. Novelists can choose to weave in a national event happening on the very day they're writing, for example. I love the idea of the interactivity, but can't say I much cotton to the notion of reading more than 100 characters or so on a tiny cell screen.

It'll be interesting to see if this genre takes off in America. As one who still likes to pick up a paper off the driveway and actually turn the pages while I read, I can't imagine ever reading anything longer than a quick text message from one of my daughers on my cell phone. Besides, these Boomer eyes would need a screen the size of checkbook to be able to hang in there long enough to finish a novel.

I feel sorry for people who read this way. They're not getting to enjoy the smell of the paper, the great sound a cracked spine makes or the joy of finding a long-lost, much-needed receipt stuck between the pages as a bookmark.

Networking on steroids: LinkedIn growing in popularity

Have you noticed the explosion in the number of people who want to get LinkedIn with you lately? Although I've used the service since shortly after it made its debut a few years ago, I can't help but notice that lately everybody wants in on the act. Perhaps they have seen some of the great media coverage the site has gotten recently.

I get several LinkedIn requests a week. I don't always accept them. It strikes me as irrelevant to connect to someone I've never heard of who happened to find me using a keyword search. The way I see it, my connections aren't relevant to me - or others - if I can't personally speak to why I'm connected to them.

I suppose it's possible that some people actually know - and can credibly introduce - hundreds or even thousands of people, but frankly, when I see people with so many connections, I automatically raise an eyebrow. "Link Hos" I call them. Seems they may be more interested in collecting links than in making true connections.

Perhaps it's fallout from the MySpace and Facebook generation. I've heard several college students comment that they have "983 friends on Facebook." Never mind that they haven't even met 971 of them.

LinkedIn can be a very powerful networking tool if used properly. I've been able to use my  genuine connections to meet people I want to know, either for personal or professional reasons. I've also reconnected to people I worked with in past jobs, as well as rekindled college friendships. And I take some pride in the fact that I can provide relevant information about every one of my connections, even without looking at their online profile. That's the very essence of networking, in my humble opinion.

What's your take? Am I being too dismissive?

Business Week floats idea of YouTube for wanna-be moguls

Business Week says it wants to start its own version of YouTube. Essentially, people who are looking for money for their business venture would get an opportunity to develop a video pitch with the intent of receiving funds to back their idea or new company.

The magazine's Executive Editor John Byrne, even envisions a contest in which wanna-be moguls can participate in an online contest to for the chance to win a cool half-million bucks. Visitors to the portal would vote on the pitch they think is worthy of funding.

When I first read the story, I thought, "What a cool idea!" It's a sure-fire way to keep people coming to the Business Week web site. All print publications are seeking to drive more online traffic as interest in print continues to slide. But then my second thought was, "Wait a minute! Voting for the best video is hardly a way to demonstrate good journalism, which is one reason Business Week is one of my favorite magazines."

As I've mulled the idea, though, I'm liking it better and better. After all, daily newspapers have been involving their audiences through blogs. In fact, USA Today's subscription rate has skyrocked since revamping its online presence and asking people to exchange views on stories. Even CNN encourages its viewers to send in their own potential news clip to iReport for the chance to have it selected for an actual broadcast.

I think Business Week is on to something. Before joining Edelman, I ran my own consulting practice for nine years. During that time, I helped numerous small companies put together their presentations for pitches to venture capitalists. Many entrepreneurs really struggled with the idea of telling their story in five minutes, which was the typical timeframe they were given at VC pitch-a-thons. The most common complaint I heard was, "I can't possibly relay how passionate I am about this through slides!" This BW video idea helps to solve that problem because now pitches can be anything from a talking head to an office tour to a person writing on a white board to a fancy PPT presentation with a voiceover narrative, along with dozens of other ideas.

If Business Week does move to this new format and you decide to "go for it," take my advice and work with a professional to ensure you have the best video possible. Remember, this isn't YouTube, where most of the videos are slapped together with little thought or creativity.

There are no "do-overs" or "let's put it out there and see what happens" when the world is watching - and voting - for you to get money.

We're watching history in the making: Va Tech tragedy changes how stories are covered

If you're still talking about "new media," please stop. There's no such thing any more. It's just media now. Citizen journalists and consumer generated content have never been more relevant than what we have seen in the past two days. The horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech tested the incredible potential - and limits - of the technology that is forever changing the way we communicate with one another, whether across the hall or around the world.

As you know by now, the most compelling video of the police on campus trying to find the gunman came from a camera phone owned by a student (who, btw, was paid by CNN for exclusive footage). So far, it has generated over 2 million views. Hundreds of people have sent what CNN calls i-reports, providing a citizen's eye view of the events as they unfold. Suddenly, the number of "reporters" covering the story has completely changed the way we are able see and absorb the story. We don't have to wait for over-produced, high-priced media personalities to reserve satellite time and set up temporary sets to tell us what they think is going on.

Meanwhile, students learned from other students who was injured, killed and missing by reading Facebook, blogs, MySpace, Wikipedia, and of course through IM's and text messages. Today, there are hundreds of Facebook pages and forums dedicated to mourning the students. In fact, one has drawn more than 28,000 members who share memories, photos, poems and questions. Global online communities are  coming together in a matter of hours. The mainstream media can't keep up. Nor, by the way, can the technology. This horrible event will serve as a blueprint for communications companies to develop even more robust interactive programming.

Over the next several weeks we can expect to see tremendous online coverage of this story as an official investigation gets underway. Every hour new information is revealed as people share their experiences and insight.  We're watching history in the making. News will never be covered the same way again.

Consider this, too: this week marked another new milestone: a majority of teens (55%) now have online profiles.  Watch that continue to grow quickly, especially with the corresponding growth in online coverage of major news.

So, let's drop talk of new media. It's so 12 hours ago.

USA Today, America's McPaper, embraces Web 2.0

One of my favorite newspapers, USA Today, has relaunched its web site and it's a real beauty. The paper that built its reputation on giving people colored pie charts and an abbreviated version of the news has decided to take a deep dive and actually involve its readers, whom they're asking to participate online and use the paper as a resource.

The first thing I noticed was all the white space on the screen, a far cry from the original wide screen layout with lots of color and bold fonts. Now, the online paper is elongated and fits on the screen in a much narrower format (which advertisers tend to love). Then, I saw how the cover photo changes as you mouse over the thumbprint photos in the margins. That means instead of selecting a cover story and playing it up, the cover story changes based on your own interest. Can you say relevant?

The site uses a public comment tool, social network capabilities and gives people the ability to upload photos and participate in blogs; in other words, all the things that make Web 2.0 the must-have format for newspapers now.

But what I like best about USAT's efforts is that they're not turning the paper over to consumers to be "citizen journalists." Instead, the paper's "real" journalists can use the consumer tools as a listening device, but the reporting will still come from those trained in the craft. Thank goodness. I've always hated the expression "citizen journalist" because it implies expertise that in most cases does not exist. (Full disclosure: this could be an ego thing with me. I have a degree in journalism and worked as a reporter for several years. I'd hate to think I wasn't special somehow.)

Watch for other newspapers, even midsize local fishwrappers, to grab on to Web 2.0 too. Today's newspapers will thrive only if they go beyond giving consumers what they need and include what they want (which, apparently, is the ability to be a part of the process).

I predict USAT will be successful because it has always had a breezy, consumer-oriented writing style that makes it appeal to the average reader, who will be quicker to share the site with "like kind." And when that happens, advertisers will start to throw their support behind it and before you know it, USAT becomes a "gotta see" portal.

Check it out.

Viewing relevance from a hospital bed

Relevance, I've learned, looks pretty different from a hospital bed. I'm lying in one now in room 619 at Kennestone Hospital in Marietta, GA, where I've spent the past four days being tested up the wazoo. I came in through the emergency room on Sunday, which is my preferred method (you get serviced faster that way and who doesn't like a little drama?).

A number of issues had me here, the most serious being the rapid increase of my creatine, which measures kidney function. My transplanted kidney was starting to poop out on me.

I certainly couldn't afford a lose a second transplant. I've run out of sisters. Lucky for me, Dr. Robert Jansen from Georgia Kidney Associates, has been on the case. First the good news... I'll be fine.

Meanwhile, I've noticed some interesting changes since my last extended visit here five years ago. The lovely hospital gown I was offered first thing wasn't the solid institutional blue of years past. Instead, it has "Hospital Property" stamped all over it. Is this to ensure I don't get it confused with my personal identical gown brought from home? Or is it a reminder of who's really the boss here? For the record, I never thought it was me. I've always assumed it was the insurance company.

For instance, yesterday I was taken to a mysterious cavernous part of the building for a colonoscopy and endoscopy (and from the way I felt later, apparently another oscopy they failed to mention). The doctor asked me if I wanted to be put to sleep for the procedure. I told him anyone who was getting ready to put a tube up my butt better have drugs or some very strong chardonnay. Then I probed (before he did), "Why would you ask?" He said, "Because it will cost your insurance company more if I do it that way. Some people prefer to just put up with the temporary discomfort."

Not this somebody. I didn't care what the insurance company thought about any of this. But it was a real "ah ha" moment for me. Insurance companies, for better or worse, are becoming more and more relevant to our everyday lives, requiring decisions that previously didn't even merit consideration.

Another thing that has struck me is how technology drives so much of the healthcare system now. Everything here beeps, rings or hums. Every person, from the surgeons to the cleaning crew, have cell phones attached as closely as vital organs and they ring constantly (the phones, not the organs). Information flies around wirelessly and yet, as far as I can tell, most of these systems don't talk to one another very well. I still had to answer the same questions 10 times. Maybe they're really just trying to determine my memory skills.

There are several channels on the internal TV system showing educational shows about various medical procedures. That's fine, but what would be even better - and more relevant - would be if I could go to the web site and just download these episodes into my iPod.  Few things are more comforting than having an articulate doctor right there in the palm of your hand gently explain something (on demand, no less).

And while they're at it, a few links to blogs and web sites about specific procedures would be good too. Right now, WellStar (Kennestone's parent) has some great information on its web site that's strictly text based, but they need to take things up a notch.

Hey, we impatient patients are sitting here with laptops picking up the wifi connection. Why not send us to pre-selected links? It might keep us busy enough to lay off the "call nurse" button for a while.

Girl Scouts go digital: Computer cookies get a whole new meaning

One of the great ironies of my life is that I got fat eating Thin Mints. I cannot resist them. I've been known to drive all over Cobb County, GA in March searching for uniformed Girl Scouts standing behind folding card tables hawking the most wicked of all treats.

But that is so last year. Now the Girl Scouts have gone digital. That's right - they're promoting their annual fundraising cookies in all the places we visit every day: YouTube, Grouper, Friendster, MySpace and more. No more driving around looking for cookies. Look for them in blogs (like this one!) and heaven only knows where else. There will be no escaping the Girl Scouts now. If you have a zip code, they can tell you the closest place to buy their cookies.

Well, let me say, "Thanks a lot, girls." I have always justified buying cookies my hips didn't need because I have a hard and fast policy to always purchase anything a child is selling for a good cause. When I started at Edelman, I even considered it an employee benefit that I could order cookies right here at the office, thanks to one little Allie Tucker, a beautiful child with the darkest, brownest, most soulful eyes I've ever seen. Although she's a talented little sales leader, the truth is all she has to do is look at me and I'll hand over a blank check.

She reminded me this year that I could order several boxes of cookies and freeze the ones I don't eat right away. I'm not sure what planet Allie is from, but in my world there's no such thing as leftover Girl Scout cookies.... or extra boxes. I ordered more than usual this year so I could participate in an Edelman plan to send some to the troops in Iraq. In case I lose that altruistic feeling when those beautiful Thin Mints, Samoas and TagAlongs arrive, I've bookmarked my favorite places where I can send others a link where they can begin their own lifelong habit that's as powerful as any drug being peddled on the street. Somehow, it feels almost dirty, but I'm sure I'll get over it.

The Girl Scouts are celebrating their 90th year of sales in 2007. More than just a fundraiser, this annual rite aims to teach girls the ins and outs of being an entrepreneur. I can't think of a better lesson they could learn than the importance of how to remain relevant in changing times. 

I congratulate them - and their partner, Ripple Effects, for this brilliant strategy. With the money I'll save in gas, I can buy more boxes of Thin Mints!

Super Bowl commericals reflect mood of the country

It's the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl as I'm writing this and I feel like I've seen enough commercials to detect a distinct pattern. It's not pretty. Seems to me the commercials have been more violent than in the past, including the cartoonish ones. What's up with that? I can only assume those producing the commercials decided to take their frustrations about the war out in supposedly more subtle ways.

Two guys who apparently love Snickers bars ripped off their chest hair. In a FedEx commercial, a poor fellow was creamed by a meteor. Bud Light showed a hitchhiker toting an ax and looking like a mass murderer, which, frankly, wasn't as scary as ETrade's depiction of a bank where the employees rip off customers and make them feel like they're in the middle of a violent bank robbery. At first I thought I was watching CSI.

I confess it struck me as a tad funny that Prudential's commercial "Like a rock" theme made me think for a nanosecond they said "Iraq."

I wasn't sure what to expect when I heard that Coca-Cola would make a comeback this year at the Super Bowl after an absence of several years, but I was delighted and pleased to see they went for the tender, sweet touch, harkening back to the days when they did the famous "Hilltop" commercial in which they offered to teach the world to sing.

Over all, I can't say I've been terribly impressed with the commercials this year. (The half-time show, however, was one of the best yet, IMHO).

Of course, not every company can afford the $2.6 million it takes to advertise for 30 seconds at the Super Bowl, which is why we have seen such a rise in companies turning to YouTube to grab viewers. A quick check of "2007 Super Bowl Commercials" on the YouTube search engine brought up several and the viewership on some is already pretty high. On the downside, a lot of the comments about the commercials are pretty snarky. At least during the big game, you only see/hear what others in your living room have to say.

This Super Bowl has been unusual in many ways, from the history-making first play (92 yard return for a touchdown) to consumer-generated commercials, to instant postings of commercials on YouTube.

There are now 6 minutes left in the game and it appears the Colts will win (YAY!). But the real winner, in my view, are the companies that got to try something new this year, whether or not it appeals to me personally. I'm eager to see how this shift from high-dollar, over-produced commercials to something more relevant to today's multitasking viewers turns out. What do you think?