How Google ruined services (it’s not how you think)

Posted On Thu, May, 17th, 2012 by Sean Marshall
bad.platform.service

Image credit: mrmomsunite.blogspot.com

Don’t let the title fool you. This is not an anti-Google rant. It’s not praise, either – it falls somewhere in the middle.

Google used to do so much for its clients. When the company was still getting established, and for many years after, it seemed Google went above and beyond to cater to client’s every whim. From lavish parties to an abundance of dedicated resources, Google’s clients lived the good life.

Things are a little different now. We operate in a world where million-dollar (annual) spenders have to call 1-800 numbers for help, and those lucky enough to have dedicated support have to run through fresh intros every six months.

Here’s the funny thing, though – the system works. As frightening as it might seem to get “stuck” with a call center when your account randomly gets reviewed (the shut-off), the level of support is adequate. It’s not the type of support that will always delight customers, but it gets the job done and, frankly, what else matters? Google realized that it could cut back on services without damaging relationships (too much). It certainly doesn’t hurt to own 75%+ of the market, and it doesn’t hurt that most companies need Google more than Google needs them. All of that said, things get done and business keeps humming.

One of Google’s greatest strengths is its platform. AdWords is the ultimate self-serve platform in the world of PPC (yes, I realize many 3rd parties offer advanced features, but we’re talking about network platforms), and that makes things much easier for the services team. Facebook and MSN (while they’ve gotten better) lag so far behind that their services teams are exposed. Deficient platforms put the burden on services orgs, and if your services group can’t handle it, the customer’s experience suffers.

Google.machine

The Google machine can support minimal service. Other machines, not so much. (Image credit: strategicgrowthanddevelopment)

This is how Google ruined services: by recognizing they could scale back their own service levels – knowing their self-serve platform could handle the load – Google set a new standard in services. Other networks, Facebook in particular, have taken cues from Google and gone straight to a model with minimal support (i.e. no agency support…that’s right, none), and it’s not working out the same way. The problem is that Facebooks of the world aren’t ready to operate like that.

By setting a high bar in the early years and then setting today’s minimal-services trend, Google has created unrealistic expectations for those customers who run on multiple networks. As much as Google customers like to complain about service (I’m lucky enough to have a kick-ass agency rep), it pales in comparison to the garbage other networks put out. I guess, through some circuitous logic, you can blame Google for all the bad service you get from other networks. It’s a Google hater’s dream.

There’s a way to fix this: improve your platform. In the year and a half since Yahoo and MSN merged their search offering, the adCenter platform has made some great strides. Granted, many of these features are just (late) copies of Google offerings, but they’ve changed things quite a bit. At the same time, they’ve rededicated themselves to support (on the agency side, at least). Our agency rep (hey, Vince!) can give our Google rep a good challenge, and that bodes well for adCenter.

In a saturated market offering many options for limited marketing budgets, these improvements have made MSN a more attractive option. This is the lesson upstarts and niche networks haven’t learned yet: until you attain “must use” status, you need to invest in services. It might strike you as egotistical, but marketers control budgets, and if you can’t win them over, you won’t get any. Just because Google did it doesn’t mean your network can do it yet. It’s fun to blame Google for starting the movement, but, at the end of the day, it’s your own fault. Fix it or someone else will get those dollars. Pretty simple, no?

- Sean Marshall, Director of Search Engine Marketing

Use your competitor’s “Likes” tab to improve your Facebook campaign

Posted On Wed, May, 16th, 2012 by admin

One of the complaints about Facebook since its inception is how dangerously accessible it makes everything – photos, status, updates. On the flip side, of course, knowledge is power. Here’s how to make knowledge about a competing brand’s numbers work for your Facebook advertising campaign.

First, look up a competitor’s Facebook page and look for the “Likes” tab. It’s located on the upper portion of the page, below the cover photo. It looks like this:

Facebook likes tab

"Like" how much data you're about to get...

This tab will show how many lifetime likes your competition has, but there’s a lot more to it.

Click on the tab, and these five useful data points appear:

facebook data

Tons of good data...what to make of it?

1. Facebook provides the “People Talking About This” metric, which was standard prior to the Timeline-for-brands rollout. What does it mean, exactly? It is the number of unique users who have engaged with the page (liked, shared, commented) in the last seven days. This number shows how you stack up against your competition – who had a bigger number of engaged fans over the last week? If you’re running a robust campaign, and your competition is beating you easily, study their page and their ads – why might theirs be more effective?

2. The “Most Popular Week” is the seven-day period when the most people were “talking about” the page. To take advantage of this information, you can look up this date range on the competitor’s Facebook timeline and see the content posted. You can tie the popularity to a particular post or promotion that worked for your competition and get some ideas from this to improve your own content and promotional strategies.

3. The “Most Popular City” is the area where most “people talking about this” are logged in when they engaged with the page. This might be a geographic region to consider for your brand to target with ads, since Facebook allows geo-targeting by country, state, city and zip code. There are some exceptions to this, though – if Coke’s most popular city is Atlanta (its headquarters), that’s not necessarily a cue for Pepsi to go all-in for the Atlanta market.

4. The “Most Popular Age Group” shows which age range included the highest number of engaged fans. Again, this information might be useful for your brand, since Facebook allows you to segment your ads by age.

5. The People Talking About This/New Likes Per Week metrics are rolled together here. To estimate how many users actually engaged (commented, shared, liked content) with your competitor’s page over the last seven days, simply subtract the number of “people talking about this” by “new likes per week.”

This graph is also useful to track unusual activity, such as sudden drops in engagement and fan acquisition. If your page has had any unusual activity, you can make certain conclusions about whether it’s isolated or Facebook-wide by checking the trend line of your competitor’s graph.

If that all seems like a lot of data about your competitors, well, yeah – it kind of is, right there for all to see. So how will you use it to benefit your brand?

- Clark Sioson, Facebook Account Manager

The Tools of PPC Ignorance

Posted On Tue, May, 15th, 2012 by Todd Mintz

“Learn to evolve and change because what was a month ago no longer is today.
Survival is the ability to adapt and change when it’s needed.”  EarlGrey, SEO

About a month ago, I wrote a post about using Automated AdWords Bidding successfully for the first time. At the time, I believed I was writing a post that showcased how clever I was in figuring out how to use an aspect of AdWords that I had previously dismissed as only useful for folks that don’t know how to professionally manage paid search accounts.

However, when I look back at that post, I see something somewhat personal and quite dark – something even the most experienced account managers can fall prey to – pre-judgment. After all, so my original thinking went, Automated AdWords Bidding is stupid because I’m letting Google decide where to bid and how much to bid (up to my stated limits), therefore Google will choose what’s best for Google and not for my client.

But, let’s take a step back now…

What is “AdWords Automated Bidding”? It’s a tool.

Is a tool inherently good or bad? No. A tool is only good or bad based on how it’s being used.

How do most people use AdWords Automated Bidding? They use it as a substitute for actively managing their campaigns, which isn’t ideal for account success.

How did I use the tool? As a vehicle for professional paid search management. And the tool met my expectations and needs.

Now, please go back and watch the above clip from Apollo 13. In it, the NASA engineers were tasked with saving the lives of astronauts using a bunch of items not well-suited for that purpose. However, because the engineers were bright, creative, out-of-the box thinkers, they were able to successfully accomplish their task.

Pre-judgment caused me to not act optimally on my client’s behalf as it pertained to Automated AdWords Bidding. Fortunately, I saw the error of my ways and coached myself to success.

Recently, AdWords announced a whole bunch of changes that most in the paid search industry are very upset about. I also question what AdWords is doing…especially making “rotate ads” a 30-day maximum setting.

But, then, I “remove myself” from the situation and look at it from a more objective perspective.

Am I pre-judging what Google is doing? Yes.

Can my clients and I actually profit from Google’s changes? Yes.

Are Google’s changes actually a disguised opportunity for future growth and success for my clients and me? Yes.

How might that be? I’m working on it.  :.)

 

It now becomes incumbent on my teammates and me to make Google’s changes work for us instead of being controlled by them.

Game on!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Todd Mintz, Senior SEM Manager

Ten Impartial Tips on Choosing an Online Marketing Agency (from a Partial Observer)

Posted On Mon, May, 14th, 2012 by David Rodnitzky

Image credit: hcssdreamjob

You’re probably reading this post with a high degree of skepticism, and I don’t blame you; getting advice on choosing an online marketing agency from the head of an online marketing agency is like asking the IRS to file your taxes for you.

But wait! Before you discount everything I’m about to say, know that prior to starting my own SEM agency, I spent eight years on the “client side,” and I negotiated with dozens of agencies (and selected several of them). So be skeptical if you must, but I suspect by the end of this article I will have convinced you that these tips are actually useful!

So without further ado, here they are — 10 tips on choosing an online marketing agency:

Judge Cultural Fit

1. Ask to talk to your account manager. Every agency has a few really smart, smooth biz dev guys who will get you excited about the agency’s knowledge and commitment to clients. Of course, once you sign your contract, you’ll seldom hear from these folks again. For this reason, ask to personally meet/talk to your day-to-day contact(s) prior to signing a contract. Is there a personal fit? Are they experienced (and not in the Jimi Hendrix sense)? Do you trust your marketing budget to be effectively managed by this person or team?

2. Figure out the agency’s average client size. Most agencies build their internal team around an expectation of a certain amount of revenue per client. As a result, if you are way too small or big for an agency, the team you end up with will likely be mismatched. For example, if you are spending $1M/month on marketing, and the agency is used to servicing $5K/month clients, the agency is likely to be overwhelmed and under-staffed to support your needs (much as they would love to work with you). Conversely, if you are the $5K/month client talking to the $1M/month agency, it’s likely that you’ll be an afterthought to your account reps and will get poor service.

3. Avoid scare tactics. Generally speaking, the bigger the agency, the more likely they will try to sell you on “CYA” – Cover Your Ass. When they can’t compete on price, service, or expertise, big companies try to scare clients into not using a smaller or lesser-known agency. Ultimately, if you’ve done a good job vetting the competency and cultural fit of your preferred agency, you should recognize this line of reasoning as an argument of last resort and ignore it.

Assess Expertise

4. Break down the agency’s business by marketing channel. Let’s say you are looking for an agency to help you with display advertising, and the agency’s Web site lists display as one of 35 marketing disciplines they manage for clients. In this case, it’s important to understand whether display advertising is really a core focus of their business, or whether they just do display as a “tack on” service. If you’re not sure that you are getting a straight answer, ask to speak to several reference clients who use the agency for the specific marketing channel you are considering.

5. Do your own due diligence. Doing reference checking on agencies is important, but ultimately references are a pretty weak method of evaluating an agency (or a potential employee, for that matter) because the agency only puts you in touch with their absolute happiest clients. If possible, go to LinkedIn or send emails to friends and try to find people who have worked with the agency and aren’t on the reference list.

6. Ask for an audit. Many agencies will do a free evaluation of your current marketing campaigns and come back with a laundry list of recommendations they would implement if selected as your agency. At a minimum, this gives you a lot of free tips, but it also helps you evaluate whether the agency’s folks really know their stuff.

examine the contract

Image credit: heathoops

Negotiate the Contract

7. Understand contract length and terms. Most advertising agencies ask for between six-month and one-year contracts (PPC Associates, by the way, only requires a two-day contract!). I’ve seen some contracts that ask for up to three years. The longer the contract, the greater the risk you take, since, if the agency turns out to be a lemon, you are stuck with them for the length of the contract (barring an expensive legal battle).

It’s also important to understand the out-clause and renewal clause. An out-clause is the amount of notice you have to give prior to canceling the contract, as well as the conditions under which you can cancel. Some one-year contracts offer a 30-day out-clause without cause at any time, meaning that you can effectively cancel the contract on Day One and be done with the agency in 30 days. Other contracts don’t allow for an out unless there is a “material breach” of the contractual terms (one party violated the contract), or until the entire term of the contract has run.

Renewal clauses can also be tricky. Some contracts auto-renew unless terminated, meaning that you have to proactively cancel the contract at the end of the term or else you are locked into an additional term of the same or greater length. Other contracts have no renewal term, meaning that you have to renegotiate the contract at the end of the term and sign a new contract. Auto-renew can be advantageous to you if you have really favorable rates, but generally I recommend removing auto-renewal clauses and giving yourself the option of renegotiating or trying a different agency at the end of the term.

8. Look for hidden fees. Some agencies low-ball clients on standard pricing terms and then nickel-and-dime them on additional fees. For example, most agencies charge on a percentage-of-spend basis, but some charge extra for services like:

A. Landing-page design
B. Custom reports
C. Banner ads
D. Translation
E. Technology
F. In-person meetings
G. Travel

All of this should be clearly spelled out in the contract. If it isn’t, you should add it in yourself.

9. Talk about the conflict-of-interest policy. Once you start working with an agency, they have access to all of your marketing data and potentially all of your internal revenue data. If the agency doesn’t have a conflict-of-interest policy, there’s a chance that they’ll bring on one of your competitors. Hopefully, if such a situation occurs, the agency has a “Chinese Wall” policy of not sharing information between two competitive accounts. Every agency has different rules and, frankly, different ethics. Ask up front, and if possible, add language into your contract that protects you. Common contractual terms to request include:

A. An exclusivity clause: the agency won’t work with anyone else in your industry.
B. An exclusion list: the agency won’t work with specific competitors.
C. A post-contract minimum time period before the agency takes on a competitor.
D. A definition of the agency’s conflict policy and Chinese Wall policy.

10. Understand who owns the data and your accounts. In the event that you and your agency “break up,” it’s important to understand who owns what data. For example, if you have a Google AdWords account and your agency declares that the account is their property, when you leave the agency, you lose all of your data and account history and have to start from scratch. This is bad on many, many levels. If possible, insist that all data – accounts, creative, etc. – are owned by you, the client, and put this in the contract!

Make a New Friend

client and agency

Image credit: womenzmag

Many clients see agencies as their adversaries, and sadly, many agencies feel the same way about their clients. It doesn’t have to be this way! Client-agency relationships usually break down due to a lack of communication, cultural fit, or financial alignment.  Use these 10 tips when selecting your next agency, and there’s a better-than-average chance you’ll end up with an agency that you think of as a friend, rather than a foe.

 

 

- David Rodnitzky, CEO

Fitbit ROI Challenge recap – Week 3

Posted On Fri, May, 11th, 2012 by admin
fitbit

On the road to victory.

Laura Rodnitzky’s daily walk to and from the PPC Associates office in downtown Chicago takes her roughly 11,000 steps, so she figured she was a favorite to win some weekly titles in the Fitbit ROI Challenge. Then she started studying her Active Score.

“It made me realize how much of the day I was just sitting around and doing nothing,” said Rodnitzky, who is the company’s director of Change Management and the Chicago office’s general manager. “I wanted to change that.”

A little awareness, a LOT of competitiveness, and one forgotten under-desk cycle later, Rodnitzky emerged as the Challenge’s week 3 winner, thanks to top-ranked finishes in steps and active score.

“I bought the cycle a year ago, but it didn’t really fit under my desk, so I didn’t use it,” she said. “But after I realized I wasn’t winning, I started using it while I was talking on the phone and doing research — anything that didn’t require a lot of typing. I had to rearrange my keyboard, mouse, and monitors to get it to fit, but now it’s become such a habit that I don’t even notice while I’m doing it.”

Rodnitzky’s motivation, other than awareness of activity habits — “Everybody should look at their charts; it’s disturbing” (author’s chart here) — came in the form of San Mateo senior production manager (and this week’s mileage winner) Monica Madrigal, who set the bar in week 1 of the Challenge and has kept right on trucking.

Rodnitzky

The fittest Rodnitzky.

“As soon as I saw the first week’s numbers, I wanted to beat Monica,” said Rodnitzky, who added that she derives little motivation from a sibling rivalry with her brother, PPC Associates CEO David Rodnitzky. (“I’ve always been the most fit of the Rodnitzky children,” she said, presumably with a dismissive hand wave and a few extra pedals.)

Rodnitzky plans to keep up the cycling through the Challenge and beyond, which is great news for the Chicago office and should inspire more effort from the San Mateo office, which improved its stats for the second straight week but once again fell shy of its Second City colleagues.

The individual weekly best:

Weekly steps taken:
1. Rodnitzky, Chicago: 185,084
2. Madrigal, San Mateo: 172,154
3. Melissa Bregar, Chicago: 148,067
4. Brittni Hamman, Chicago: 145,984
5. Hillary Read, San Mateo: 131,742

Weekly miles traveled:
1. Madrigal, San Mateo: 94.65
2. Rodnitzky, Chicago: 81.29
3. Read, San Mateo: 79.34
4. Bregar, Chicago: 79.09
5. Hamman, Chicago: 66.09

Weekly active score:
1. Rodnitzky, Chicago: 15,951
2. Madrigal, San Mateo: 15,473
3. Bregar, Chicago: 15,030
4. Hamman, Chicago: 14,339
5. Kristin Kopp, Chicago, 11,476

Most improved (over Week 2):
Steps: Rodnitzky, Chicago: +47,237
Miles: Hamman, Chicago: +25.20
Active score: Rodnitzky, Chicago: +4,338

The weekly numbers, by office:

Weekly average steps/participant (week 2 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 81,537 (+1,271)
San Mateo: 64,775 (+854)

Weekly average miles/participant (week 2 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 39.36 (-.30)
San Mateo: 33.11 (+2.04)

Weekly average active score/participant  (week 2 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 7,458 (+418)
San Mateo: 5,747 (+268)

What to watch in week 4:
Will Rodnitzky and Madrigal push each other over 200K steps? Will another dark horse (Melissa Bregar?) emerge? Will San Mateo close the gap? And…stop me if you’ve heard this before, but will a man crack any of the top five?

- Hillary Read, Marketing Manager

 

A WFH case study: why flexible policies benefit everyone

Posted On Thu, May, 10th, 2012 by Jeremy Mayes
home office

This is not the desk of a slacker.

A recent post by Sean Marshall caught my attention. Regular readers know I’m a huge advocate of the remote workforce and think it brings incredible value to both companies and employees. Every time I see a post or article about remote working, I feel compelled to chime in! Sean nailed it terms of describing the benefits, so I won’t rehash it. Instead I would like to use myself and one of my experiences around working remotely as an example of just how significant this type of arrangement can be.

Rewind a few years. I accepted a position with a company that was based in Toronto. The company was in a state of change and had a new CEO that was based in the Chicago area. At the time I started, the small team in the states just had some temporary office space in the Chicago suburbs. The team I was working with and the person I was working for were based out of Toronto, and the temporary space was full, so for the next six months I was WFH almost 100% of the time.

As the team grew in the states, they upgraded to some new office space with plenty of room. It was about that time hints started getting dropped that I needed to spend more time in the office. At the time I was basically a one-man show running 50 PPC accounts, so I never commented on or addressed the comments about me being in the office. I had been crushing it for the past six months at home, so I sort of assumed the “in the office” stuff would just go away. It didn’t, though, and as time went on it became less of a suggestion/hint and more of a demand.

At that point I needed to make my case. I simply wasn’t prepared to spend five days a week in the office. I’m on the fringe of a growing segment of the workforce known as “super commuters,” so heading to the office wasn’t a 20-minute endeavor. It wasn’t that I didn’t want to work or spend time with the team; it was how much less productive and happy I would be and how much my expenses would increase if I made the trip five times a week. I decided to put some numbers together to help convince the powers that be that my being in the office would actually be a detriment to what we were trying to accomplish!

At the time, my day generally started at 7 am, and I worked, for the most part, until 6 pm.  Factor in some breaks and lunch, and I was working 10 hours per day or 50 hours per week, not including anything that would happen on weekends. How would my week change if I went to the office?

Time

Weekly travel time = 15 hours/week

Lunch = 5 hours/week

Random conversations, distractions, etc. = 5 hours/week

New meetings (since I was there and all) = 5 hours/week

commute

There are more productive ways to spend your time.

Of course, the expectation was that the commute time was “mine” and should not take away from my productivity. Pull that out and that still leaves 15 hours that were “taken” from 50 for things that happen when you’re in an office. As I told my boss, that’s 15 hours – basically two working days – per week of productivity that’s now lost. That’s 60 hours a month of productivity that’s gone!

Expenses

Without going into every last detail, let’s just say that when you have a 150-mile round trip every day that includes four tolls each way, it can get expensive. At the time, commuting expenses worked out to about $200/week or $800/month. Given the increases in costs over the last few years, this has gone nowhere but up.

Happiness

At the time, my family was just getting started; I had recently married and had one child and another on the way. While WFH I could take five minutes here and there for interaction with the family and was always around for other things like deliveries or service-related issues like getting a furnace fixed. I didn’t have to fight traffic and had flexibility in my schedule, so I could do things that were important to me. In general I was pretty happy.

The thought of spending 15+ hours a week driving back and forth, missing all sorts of things with my family because I was 70 miles away and couldn’t get home before 7 pm, was less than appealing. Without a doubt, going to the office five days a week would have a negative impact on my happiness and quality of life.

To sum it up, my employer had an employee who was putting in 50 solid hours a week, was producing great results for the business, and was by all accounts happy with the arrangement. By requiring me to come in five days a week, they lost 15 hours of productivity, my pay was essentially cut by $10,000 a year, and I was basically unhappy due to the huge dip in my overall quality of life. In hindsight it was the beginning of the end of my time with that company. I could never really get on board with five days in the office, and my employer could never really get on board with developing a remote workforce.

The takeaway?

If you’re a manager or business owner, and your employees can do their job well from anywhere, you should ask yourself: why force them to come into an office? If it’s a trust thing, you need new employees (as Sean said in his post). If you think people are more productive, you’re kidding yourself; odds are they are far less productive. If it’s a control thing, perhaps you should consider a career path that does not involve managing people.

If you’re an employee that values WFH arrangements, especially an employee in the online marketing industry, don’t settle. The best companies to work for are ahead of the curve in this regard and already have very progressive WFH policies.

Thank you for reading – and let it be known that I wrote this post while WFH!

- Jeremy Mayes, Account Executive

Let Us Now Praise Working From Home

Posted On Wed, May, 9th, 2012 by Sean Marshall

Guarantee you she's getting stuff done. (Image credit: glotorious.com.)

I was trolling around on Facebook last night and saw a post from my sister-in-law in which she bemoaned having to work from home. In it, she wrote, “I hate working from home, is that weird?”

In short: yes.

I love working from home, and while I realize that it’s not a work style that suits everyone, “hate” is a strong word. Okay, so perhaps I’m splitting hairs here – the word hate gets thrown around a lot on Facebook – but I’m still baffled as to how WFH could elicit such a strong reaction.

Maybe it has to do with the industry you’re in. Insofar as online marketing is concerned, WFH is a godsend. Some days I’m just tired and would rather work from my bed. Some other days, I start answering emails at 7am, and before I know it, it’s 11am, I’m still in my pajamas, and I have no desire to stop the roll I’m on. Don’t get me started on sick days – winter colds have been ravaging offices for decades, and people are still fixated on “showing up” to show their peers how dedicated they are. Look, unless you’re working in a restaurant or somewhere else where physical presence is a requirement, STAY HOME.

Homer Simpson working from home

He doesn't do much at the office either.

A company’s WFH policy is largely predicated on trust. There’s some belief that, if you’re in the office, you’re somehow getting more done. The concept is asinine. If I want to futz around on Facebook and Twitter all day, I’ll do so regardless of where I am. Being visible has nothing to do with productivity. It’s an antiquated notion that doesn’t really factor output into the discussion. If one of your employees has to commute 2 hours (round-trip) to make it to the office, then please tell me how driving in to do the same thing they could do at home is more productive. My answer: it’s not.

Look, if you don’t trust your employees to get things done, get new employees. If you make people accountable for certain deadlines and expectations, and they don’t meet them because of where they are, fire them. It’s really not that complicated. Those who do make it and continuously execute regardless of where they are will THRIVE under this arrangement (here are some tips on how to make WFH work for you). Freedom and flexibility are earned privileges, but the moment you stop having to worry about being around for a UPS delivery or stepping out for a dentist appointment, life suddenly gets a lot easier.

- Sean Marshall, Director of Search Engine Marketing

Social media: a business imperative

Posted On Tue, May, 8th, 2012 by admin

Image credit: nimble.com

According to Nielsen, roughly  80 percent of Americans who are active on the internet use social media. The realm of social networks is primed for involvement from businesses both large and small. Benefits like open lines of communication to customers, building relationships with both old and new customers, and cultivating brand presence are too big for businesses to ignore. No matter the industry – whether a B2B online payroll provider or an online shoe retailer – your company can grow by making use of social media – if careful analysis of cost/benefits bears out the profitability of the channels.

In fact, it has become clear to many businesses that refraining from entering social media could actively damage their reputation and hurt their profits. Customers want to be able to contact the companies they use and have an open dialogue about any problems that come up, and social networks like Facebook and Twitter allow them to do so easily. If a business is absent from that space, the customer will likely either complain about the company or find a competitor who is willing to communicate with them.

In addition to providing a clear line of communication between company and customer, services like Foursquare help actively attract new customers, though it takes careful planning and tracking to ensure that these promotions end up providing a net benefit. From a Radio Shack case study that tracked Foursquare’s effect on consumer behavior:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some businesses provide discounts to customers who check in on Foursquare in a given time period, hoping to bring in new clients and retain established ones. If, however, the company is spending more on managing the promotion and losing more money on the discounts than new customers provide with their business, the endeavor has failed. Sure, maybe a few more people are coming in, but how many will stay when they no longer receive a discount? And how many new customers have to come in before the promotion can be deemed profitable? Clear attention to detail and diligent recording and reporting of statistics are the only things that can suss out exactly what kind of impact Foursquare, Groupon, and other online discounts produce.

The results of campaigns on services like Facebook and Twitter are even more difficult to analyze, often requiring dedicated social media managers to control, shape and direct. Determining how the sites affect profits and profit margins takes an even keener eye. As with any form of advertising (even the most indirect), it’s important to be able to detail exactly how much money is spent managing social media, gaining Facebook likes, Twitter follows and Google+ +1s. Without being able to break down exactly how much money is being spent per desirable action, it’s impossible to tell whether social media is making a positive impact on the business at all.

Luckily, Google Analytics measures referral clicks from social media, and Facebook and Twitter have relatively robust interfaces to track engagement:

Twitter data

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebook data

 

 

Twitter and Facebook are all about communication, building a brand, and fostering relationships with users. Contests and promotions can be offered through or using these services, but their primary purpose in business is to focus conversations with a company, helping customers resolve any disputes with the company and giving the business as much data as possible concerning how pleased clients are with their services.

Becoming part of the social media revolution is an integral part of surviving in today’s ever-more-digital world. People want to be able to contact companies in a wide variety of ways and receive consistent, reliable response. But without collecting and analyzing the data from social networks, no business can get an accurate sense of how well their efforts are being received. By relying on hard facts and numbers to guide social media decisions, companies can decide whether a specific campaign is working out and where they may need to shift focus, giving them much-needed consumer-based feedback.

- Joseph Baker

TGI…M? Why great SEMs love Mondays

Posted On Mon, May, 7th, 2012 by admin

Image credit: corpnet

What makes a great SEM? I’ve heard a lot of answers to that question since starting at PPC Associates in August, and I think the most common ones are, in some order: dedication to the client; a balance of attention to detail with a strong prioritization system; the ability/desire to learn quickly; math/statistics skills; and creativity.

Here’s the one I rarely hear but that permeates every minute of an SEM’s career: competitiveness.

It’s wanting not to just meet goals but to beat the crap out of them (which has the fundamental effect of delighting the client). It’s the thrill of watching your ads creep (profitably) up the ranks. It’s the satisfaction of seeing CTR improve thanks to new ads you just created. It’s even in the complexity of attribution (that click did work!) and in the hunt of retargeting.

Yup, we’re in it for our clients, and that will always be the primary driving force. But the fire in the belly to do a job well, to claw past competitors and beat targets — that’s not far behind. Which, since some clients come and go, has to be the backbone of great SEM. It keeps us fresh and it keeps things fun (even our company’s fun stuff, like the very heavily used ping-pong room and fantasy football leagues and the Fitbit ROI Challenge, are all about competition). It’s also evidenced by the fact that we have a decent proportion of former college athletes in our ranks.

Image credit: popularadvise.com

And, I think, it’s why Monday mornings aren’t mopey around here. There’s adrenaline in the air, a little sizzle of buckling back in for the week (don’t worry, clients — we do plenty of weekend work) and taking the controls.

While I don’t do much SEM work in my job, I can say the energy is contagious. It makes me want to come in on Mondays, to figure out what we’re doing this week that’s cool and worthy of trumpeting (and tweeting) to the masses. What kind of stature our clients are getting that leads to a series of behind-the-scenes high fives.

As our CEO, David Rodnitzky, likes to say, TGIM. And have a great week, everyone!

 

- Hillary Read, Marketing Manager

 

Fitbit ROI Challenge recap – Week 2

Posted On Fri, May, 4th, 2012 by admin

So…the PPC Associates San Mateo office felt pretty good about things during week 2 of our Fitbit ROI (Return on Intensity) Challenge. We were taking more steps, going the extra mile (literally), being more active. But we hadn’t accounted for Chicago production assistant Kristin Kopp.

The star of week 2.

A solid performer in week 1, Kopp shot out from under the radar to take home four category wins (including miles traveled and a sweep of the most-improved standings) and lead the Chicago team to a decisive week 2 triumph over an improving San Mateo squad.

“I run six or seven miles, five mornings a week,” said Kopp, who is training for the Chicago Rock ‘n Roll Half Marathon (as part of the world’s most athletic bachelorette party) in July. “It definitely pushes me; there are days I don’t want to go that far, but I’ve gotta get my steps in. I also take the stairs instead of the elevator at work now — actually, I take the stairs everywhere now.”

How good was Kopp in week 2? The difference between her week 1 and week 2 scores was better than the San Mateo week 2 average in all three categories.

“I’m a very competitive person,” Kopp said. “My husband thinks I’m crazy; if I’m close to a goal late at night, I’ll pace back and forth until I get it.” She added that she was also inspired by week 1′s standout, San Mateo’s Monica Madrigal, and made it a goal to top Madrigal’s averages.

Madrigal did hold off Kopp for this week’s Steps crown, while Chicago senior production manager Melissa Bregar rose up for the week’s top Active Score tally. Here’s the full list of the week’s best individual performers (Windy City, we salute you):

Weekly steps taken:
1. Madrigal, San Mateo: 170,630
2. Kopp, Chicago: 168,988
3. Laura Rodnitzky, Chicago: 137,847
4. Hillary Read, San Mateo: 133,406
5. Melissa Bregar, Chicago: 132,226

Weekly miles traveled:
1. Kopp, Chicago: 86.52
2. Madrigal, San Mateo: 80.40
3. Read, San Mateo: 72.28
4. Bregar, Chicago: 67.99
5. Heather Roddy Scott, Chicago: 63.93

Weekly active score:
1. Bregar, Chicago: 14,630
2. Madrigal, San Mateo: 14,296
3. Kopp, Chicago: 13,628
4. Rodnitzky, Chicago: 11,613
5. Brittni Hamman, Chicago, 11,016

Most improved (over Week 1):
Steps: Kopp, Chicago: +83,902
Miles: Kopp, Chicago: +46.56
Active score: Kopp, Chicago: +6,611

Winning smiles...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The numbers, by office:

Weekly average steps/participant (week 1 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 80,266 (+ 17,960)
San Mateo: 63,921 (+8,621)

Weekly average miles/participant  (week 1 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 39.66 (+10.09)
San Mateo: 31.07 (+4.31)

Weekly average active score/participant (week 1 comp. in parentheses):
Chicago: 7,140 (+1,174)
San Mateo: 5,479 (+430)

What to watch in week 3:
Can both teams continue to improve? Who will be the next star to emerge? Will the arrival of a Fitbit Aria scale be the jump-start the San Mateo team needs? Will a male crack the leaderboard? Stay tuned.

- Hillary Read, Marketing Manager

« Older Entries