About Katebb


Website: http://www.katebrodock.com
Katebb has written 115 articles so far, you can find them below.


DigiActive Post: Campaign – Ali Ardekani videoblogs about the everyday life of a Muslim

A few weeks ago, Talia wrote about the Ramadan blog that had been started by three Muslims giving their perspectives on the Holy Month.  This week, I wanted to highlight another activism campaign along the same vein.

Description: Ali Ardekani, Co-Founder of Ummah Films, has launched a series of videoblogs that highlight issues concerning both the identity and image of Muslims around the world.  Under the alias “Baba Ali” and using Bill Cosby as a role model, Ali attempts to paint Muslims, especially American Muslims, as ordinary.  Using his comedic talents, he directly addresses some of the views that people may have of  extremism in “all Muslims.” He does not deny the fundamentalist views that there are held by some Muslims, but clearly does not condone them…..

Visit DigiActive for the full post.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

DigiActive Post: Effective use of Twitter and hashtags during Hurricane Gustav

Description:

As Hurricane Gustav threatened the New Orleans area last week, citizens found new ways to update the public on how things were developing on the ground.  In an attempt to decrease some of the chaos that occurred during Hurricane Katrina, Twitter users from the region mobilized themselves to offer a way not only of quickly disseminating the information via tweets, but also to centralize the information via the use of hashtags.

Visit DigiActive for the full post.

Your Brand: Being Online and Brand Equity

[This was originally posted on the Other Side Group blog]

Above is a depiction, provided by Brand Channel of the factors that go into a brand’s equity. I could have inserted any number of images, but the general concepts are the same.

I want to talk about brand equity because I don’t feel there has been enough straight forward conversation about what this means in new and social media. We all know that most brand images are effected by their presence online, but I wonder how much real discussion there is with colleagues and, more importantly, with clients about what this means to the bottom line (sidenote: there are still many spaces that aren’t highly visible online, so, for now, we’re talking about industries for which the Web 2.0 space is highly important).

I’ll use just a few of the above factors as examples:

  • Image and Personality: Several months ago, Chris Brogan had a webinar that was called “Who Really Owns Your Brand?” (I discussed it in-depth here). He and the discussants talked about the changes that occur to your brand image in social media: that customers now have more influence over your brand, and that the amount of control a company has over their image is shifting away from them. A company can decide to either enter this space and influence to some extent where their brand is going, or they can remain in a traditional mindset and “push” brand image on customers. We know where that’s headed…..
  • Awareness: There are a ton of possible consumer touch points available to companies in the new media space. There are also very attractive opportunities for Word-of-Mouth (WOM). There’s the possibility that customers can bring either positive or negative brand awareness to the table in a high-profile manner. A major way that people become aware of a brand nowadays is online, through friends and in communities. With an increased positive brand awareness comes an increase in brand equity.
  • Loyalty: Discussion and conversation with your customers (when done properly) breeds loyalty. I don’t need to beat this one to death. Online is where this is taking place. You wouldn’t want to be left out of the conversation of your own brand would you, or left out of the opportunity to develop a relationship with your customers?

These are just some examples, I could break down all of the above further if I wanted to but I think you get where I’m headed.

The main point is that, while we all know these things, I wonder how many of us directly correlate it to brand equity in the monetary sense, especially with clients. This is important, so let me repeat. New/social media and the Web 2.0 space have important effects on the monetary value of your company.

We recently had a potential client who was wondering what the point was of using new media in his marketing program if they were looking to enter IPO stages in less than five years. The company was absolutely a candidate for new media marketing, and its brand image was already being affected positively and negatively in this space.

My argument to him was (not only that the space is moving incredibly fast and five years could make a huge difference), but, almost more importantly: Your brand image IS online right now, and it IS being affected. And that DOES and WILL matter when determining the value of your company. In some cases, it’s not even a matter of going where it’s hot (although that has its advantages!). Your brand is there, you should be there too.

What’s more, the Web 2.0 world is completely visible to anyone who chooses to look, including potential funders or buyers of your company. That information matters. I’ll not deny that measurement of that value in dollar terms is difficult, but many traditional aspects of brand equity are the same. It still applies.

Most funders and buyers are looking to social media to figure out at least part of the value of brands (and if they’re not, they probably should be, because it’s often one of the best indicators of how consumers feel about your brand). It should be considered right along side of sales figures or profitability.

So I encourage people to talk to clients directly not just about the benefits of new media marketing, but also about the necessity to be in the space from a brand management perspective.

Have you discussed this with clients? Do you consider it important? Is it too vague at this stage to be put into monetary terms? Any thoughts are welcome.

Has New Media Left Strategy in the Dust?

[This was originally posted on the Other Side Group blog]

I’m exaggerating, but I do think the plunge that companies have taken into the new media space has largely ignored the importance of strategy in a way we haven’t quite seen before.

Why?

The field of new media “gained” on us very quickly, it changes every day, new tools pop up while others disappear, and one thing will work for one company while it’ll wreak havoc on another. The focus on tools lends itself to a focus on tactics. A company that “gets it” and becomes successful either gets those tools, or they’re lucky, but the success alone makes more people want to jump in and get a piece of the action.

One of the big factors in this field is exactly the speed at which it’s developing: It’s so hot right now that people feel like they should be in it or they’ll die, but at the same time, it’s a different field almost every day.

Coupled with that is the fact that the field is open and can be used by anyone. It’s not industry specific. It’s not like a few car companies with a new technology (which can certainly cause failures for some and huge successes for others). EVERYONE wants to be in the new media space and it can theoretically be used by ANY company or individual with access to the internet. Successes and failures start adding up a lot more at that level, and it becomes harder to identify best- or worse-practices.

The Problem

What I’m seeing more and more, however, is companies that both jump-in-blind and shoot-from-the-hip. Not only do they not really get some of the technologies or platforms, but they more often than not don’t think about an overall strategy for their entry, let alone incorporating their moves into overall company strategy.

I’ve seen the following trends (some of these are very general and not meant to be all-encompassing):

  1. Companies are going to PR agencies first, because PR agencies are the ones that tend to implement the tools. Companies aren’t consulting marketers or strategists, and often times they aren’t even consulting the marketing department inside their own companies as much as they should. Somehow they’ve decided that the two are separate functions.
  2. PR agencies tend to use tactics over strategy. They gather up the new media tools and develop a process behind one or a few, and focus on the implementation. Strategy is downplayed, if brought into the equation at all, and the campaign ends up being sporadic or misaligned with company strategy because it’s separated and made to be simply a process.
  3. Companies sometimes try and take new media involvement on themselves, and again, lose sight of strategy, and develop a very ad hoc system to play around with in the new media space, tool-by-tool.

What this leads to is a colossal waste of resources on a program that isn’t cohesive and doesn’t get the results one hopes for.

Fixing the Problem

Using a military example, any successful military commander that has ever lived will tell you that tactics are useless without a good strategy (or without a strategy period). You can’t patch things together into a successful fort seizure unless you have the entire plan laid out and the objective made clear.

Any great marketer or any basic Marketing 101 book will tell you the exact same thing. This was pulled from one such book, which stresses both the importance of top-level strategy to any strong marketing plan as well as the need to develop tactics and programs to support that strategy.

A few things companies can do when thinking about diving into this space:

  1. Internally align yourself with your own marketing department and make sure that everyone is clear on how this works into overall company strategy. There have to be reasons why you think it would benefit the company and clear ways in which it can remain cohesive. As Zach said last night in his talk on Corporate Blogging: “if you want to set up a corporate blog just to set up a corporate blog, you’re not doing it for the right reasons.” [disclaimer: his talk was far more interesting than that simple statement, for more check out his blog].
  2. If you choose to do the process internally, do not go tool by tool and use them separately. Develop a plan, do research on what others have found beneficial or detrimental, know how to use the tools and how they can work together. Then make sure that transfers into a clear strategy. Make the strategy detailed and focused, too general will lead to the shooting-from-the-belt syndrome.
  3. If you go to an external firm for help, I would suggest going with one that highlights strategy in their process. If they’re not asking you for overall goals, what you hope to gain, they may not know themselves.

Obviously I’m a little biased, since I work for a marketing strategy firm that deals in the new media space, but I would suggest going with a marketing firm first. Most of them have relationships with PR agencies that will then help you with the tactics and programs (although, for the record, we can help on the tactical level as well). For instance, we have a relationship with Spotlight Communications for some of our PR needs: we can develop the strategy and then pass it to the communications folks. Usually, since the project is split, the cost doesn’t end up being that much more, but you get a heck of a lot more in terms of taking the process from strategy straight through to program (which is what you should be doing anyway!).

You can also easily go with just a PR agency, but choose ones that are asking the right questions and identifying the right things concerning your strategy before they start talking about all the great tools out there that you can use.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Global New Media

An area of interest of mine is international similarities/differences, especially in emerging markets. Another “area of interest” is finding opportunities (which can be a pain in the butt sometimes when your mind keeps turning and it’s 2am and you haven’t gone to sleep yet, but is usually rewarding). The following is a good example of what I mean.

In our last Central Asia and the Caucasus class two weeks ago, we were discussing our possible roles as future “international people” (our school has yet to come up with one title for all of our graduates who are getting Masters in International Relations. International people does the trick for now). Our professor is great because he always pushes us on the applicability of our degree, which makes me breath a sigh of relief after three years (sweet, we’re going to actually use this stuff!).

Anyway, so here I am, about to go into the new media field, and we’re talking about the political, economical and social structure of Central Asia. Essentially, the small business world in most countries in this region is very limited under the governments (I’ll stop at that, as this topic alone could probably take up five blog posts alone). Business skills are likewise limited.

In a round about way, I came to the question of: What does new media mean in countries like this? If I were to have a project in, say, Kazakhstan, in what form would it be?

Countries/regions/companies/you-name-it have varying skill sets and varying levels of skill. A highly interactive social media site which might work here just won’t fly in many countries. But does that mean that new media is useless to them? Does it mean they haven’t reached new media levels, as we’ve* described them yet? Or does the definition of new media change for every scenario? Is their new media a simpler version of ours (or vice versa, as I’m sure there are international players beating “us”), but still considered new media? Is new media relative or comparative?

It can best be depicted by the below:

As you can see, a “simple” solution might be enough in a less developed new media environment, and, in terms of what’s needed, will be a more complete solution.

What does this say about new media cross-border? I welcome your comments.

* Don’t read too much into “we” or “us,” I only mean more developed vs less developed new media, where I consider the people probably reading this post to be at least familiar with more developed new media capabilities.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Page 12 of 12« First...«789101112

Feed me!

What I thought

Catch me speaking

SXSWi - 12 March, 12:30-1:30, Austin TX

Innovation Uncensored by Fast Company - 18 April, NYC

Check out our book!




Obviously you were wondering what time it was....

Widget By S107 Helicopter

Get Adobe Flash player

Follow me

My Company