I have been Tweeting on Twitter for awhile and I really enjoyed a recent session on Microblogging and Twitter: who’s using Twitter and for what purpose? What is the business value of use cases?

Some current uses of Twitter from the group:

• Drive Traffic to other web content - such as blogs, announcements, articles, etc. Promotion - PR - push out/ broadcast announcements, events, etc.

• News, breaking news, awareness
• Social Filtering - getting your news via Twitter now - some rely on Twitter now to get general news.
• Communication efficiency - the nature of the brief and frequent posts, its efficient and effective
• Brand Cachet - for those who are currently on Twitter
• Work streaming - updates, status,
• Reports from the field, live messaging
• Member support
• Conversation monitoring/ brand tracking

Twitter etiquette - “Twitiquette”
Things to think about…

• Tweet Formats: A lot of discussion about “is it acceptable to have multiple persona’s on Twitter?” General consensus was yes, similar to having multiple emails.

• Do you Twitter professionally vs. personally? Public persona’s - some people are experimenting with multiple identities in Twitter (personal vs. private). There are examples at companies like Zappos where there are many employees with Zappos in the Twitter name alias.
• What happens when a “fan” takes over your brand name on Twitter?
• When do you use Twitter to broadcast only vs. get into dialog?

In one of my recent speeches, I applied Malcolm Gladwell’s Tipping Point principles to conclude that we are at or approaching this point for the mobile internet, and are on the verge of explosive growth. He extracted his principles from looking at the conditions driving the spread of viruses, and applied them to new businesses and other social phenomena.

The three principles are:

1. Law of the Few: There is power in the individual on a stand-alone basis, rather than relying on a large group
2. Stickiness Factor: Once “infected”, the “virus” would stay locked in. Many web 2.0 services spend a great deal of energy creating stickiness in their strategies
3. Power of Context: Other external factors that will enhance or defeat the”virus”

Thanks to Esme Vos, I saw this thoughtful post-mortem on the demise of Meetro.com, and realized it was an interesting test of the tipping point principles. This was a site that displayed locations and profiles of “friends” on their mobile devices.

Of Malcolm Gladwell’s three principles to drive viral growth, I suspect Meetro scored very well on #2 and was about to score well on #3, but fell down on #1.

It was difficult to develop #1. Law of the Few because no individual could benefit from the service himself; it required large numbers of members to be effective. I suspect by the profile that Meetro did well with #2. Stickiness Factor, by providing a broad range of functions and services to members, once connected. And unfortunately Meetro died before it could benefit from the explosive growth of Web-enabled mobile devices (such as the iPhone, which would have enhanced #3. Power of Context. As Paul Bragiel points out in his post, there might still be a brilliant future for this service, perhaps provided by a company that can already deliver a large network of users, thus delivering on principle #1.

I wonder how many VCs are doing Tipping Point strategic analyses of startups, in addition to creating stacks of discounted cash flow projections? It would seem to be worthwhile.

I loved Cyndy Aleo-Carreira’s blog post on why we don’t need a social network for every product! I do agree that we don’t need a social network for every product! I always like to view social media from the perspective of the user - and often when I don’t see the value, its usually because I can’t relate to the network, they charge for what I can get for free elsewhere, or the user experience is so poor that I don’t bother.

There are a few social networks that come to mind that I just don’t see the value in: Classmates.com (They charge for what Facebook provides for free) or PMSBuddy (I don’t feel the need to share this info with friends!) - though I am sure I am going to be flooded with emails on why these sites are incredibly useful. I have seen over time that there is a social network for everyone, but personally I don’t want to socialize around every product or topic. Instead what I would like to see is social media tools (comment, rate, send to a friend, RSS, embed URL) become an integrated feature of most web based content.

My favorite social networks include: Flickr, Twitter , Facebook, LinkedIN, Experts-Exchange, Etsy and Pleoworld. Full Disclosure that I am biased when it comes to Ugobe/ Pleoworld - Crimson advises Ugobe on the strategy amd management of the Pleoworld community!

I’ve been working in web for 12 years now - I built my first community strategy for a client in 1996. If there’s one thing that I have learned, it’s that everyone considers themselves to be a “strategist”. Having said that, when you are working on web initiatives of any significant size, you are working as a part of a team, an eco-system of people who all bring something important to the table.

In a conversation with a client we were reviewing just how many different flavors of web strategists there are - and how do clients determine what kind of web strategist they need? Below is a review of many of the common types of web strategists and their respective strengths:

• General Web Strategist - this kind of web strategist has a broad and deep experience base, has usually come from an agency or consulting background… has really “been there and done that” with almost any kind of web project or business model. They are experienced enough to be flexible to work on most kinds of web projects and the best ones have implemented their strategies.
• Web Marketing Strategist - a strategist who is focused on outbound web marketing techniques. They live and die by data and results.
• PR Strategist - a PR professional who leverages social media and web marketing as an integrated part of PR strategy. Could include monitoring conversations, identifying influencers, syndicating content using social media for PR purposes.
• Brand Strategist - usually focused on more of the creative, UI and brand elements of web. These strategists usually come from a creative or agency background.
• Advertising Strategist (Media, SEO, SEM, WOM) Focused on media and online advertising.
• CRM/ Web Strategist - a strategist focused on the customer contact strategy, customer touchpoints and CRM. A sub-set of this can be relationship marketers or database marketers. It will be interesting to see how this role evolves given how social media has changed the touchpoints companies have with customers.
• Web Analytics Strategist - focused on the measurement and analytics of web. Could encompass everything from basic web analytics to rich media, community and social media analytics. Like web marketers, for this strategist - data is king.
• User Experience Strategist - a strategist that looks at the audience in detail and optimizes the overall user experience. Often these strategists come from an information architecture or creative background.
• Content Strategist - plans the overall content in a web site - which could include editorial, third party content or user-generated content. Considerations such as assessing audience content needs, publishing strategy, licensing, syndication of content are all considerations.
• Technical Web Strategist - sometimes referred to as a “Solutions Architect” Looks at the technology and infrastructure needs, technical requirements and informs the development needs. Typically these strategists come from a consulting or developer background.
• Subject Matter Experts - Web strategists focused on a specific industry (SMB), point solution (wikis. blogs) or audience segment (Gen Y).
• Community Strategist - A strategist that understands the complex interactions between community members and the ongoing needs, opportunities and dynamics of online communites. A sub-set of this could also be Community Managers who are very hand-on yet closely tied to the strategy of how to build, grow and manage the community.
• Social Media Strategist - focused on leveraging social media for marketing purposes. In my opinion the best social media strategists are those that walk their talk - they actually blog, they use Twitter, they belong to social networks and communities.

I don’t agree with Steve Rubel that the need for these roles will eventually disappear - I think that’s a wishful-thinking PR perspective. I have seen increasing demand in our enterprise client base for web and social media skills. While I do agree that these skills will eventually become required for all marketers, I believe that there is always room for experienced, quality consultants. Jeremiah Owyang did a post on the need for the social media manager and two distinct roles that Forrester sees emerging: the social media manager and the community manager.

Most enterprise marketers are just beginning to experiment with social media and I believe its a long way off before they acquire deep skills. In the meantime, when leveraging the skills of a web strategist, its important to ensure that you are engaging the right kind of strategist to meet your objectives.

In a recent discussion with a client, we were talking about how well their recent strategic shift was going towards a new market segment. They told me that at first blush, it looked pretty good. Sales of the product were robust, so SVP of Sales was quite happy.

Since we focus on marketing, we asked the SVP Marketing, why this product was successful. Upon further analysis, the marketing leader revealed that the new products were selling to the existing customer base, not the new market, as was intended. So, we started to drill more deeply.

The products were actually designed for a new market, not the existing one. They were designed by looking at the needs of the new market (bravo). But, there were several things not taken into consideration when creating the product market fit:

1. Did their existing market have a need for this new product?
2. Were they willing to potentially cannibalize sales of old product for sales of this new product, especially when the new product has lower margins?
3. How could they get channel partners to sell to the new market?

Let’s look at each of these issues briefly:

1. Existing market needs. On the one hand, our client didn’t even consider the needs of their installed base when designing this product. Clearly they should have. On the other hand, being opportunistic, they have discovered market demand for their product.
2. Cannibalization. I feel very, very strongly about this point. Either our client is going to cannibalize sales into their installed base with lower margin products or the competition is going to take that business. It is a strategic imperative to ensure you get those revenues, and not pretend that your customers aren’t going to buy the new products anyway. Companies must cannibalize to survive.
3. Channel Partners. Our client admitted two errors. First, they expected their current channel partners to sell to the new market. Ummmm, channel partners will sell where they already know how to sell, not where you want them to. Second, they didn’t recruit new channel partners – the ones who were already selling to their target market for this new product. (for more info on a solution-based approach to channel sales, see “The New Solution-Selling Paradigm” by Allan Adler and Dylan Charles)

How might you have handled this situation differently than our client?

Many real and wannabe macro-economists like to debate which economy will grow the most in the next 20-30 years: India or China? Singapore or Taiwan? Much of the arguments boil down to whether central control is more or less effective than entrepreneurial and organic growth (see Glenn Gow’s article “Gaining Competitive Advantage” on Crimson Consulting’s website for more insight on how a company can effectively compete against an established market leader.)

Now we can bring that debate to the mobile internet. Apple represents controlled and centralized growth with the iPhone, even keeping a lid on who gets access to the SDK and managing the distribution of new applications via iTunes. Google seems to be taking the opposite approach with the Android platform. They have just announced the 50 winners of development seed capital, which according to Eric Zeman at InformationWeek, cover a broad range of location-based services, security, safety, social networking, and media applications.

Over the next few years we will be able to watch to see which approach works better. There is room in the market for both to work, but for different audiences. My guess is:

• Apple, by controlling the technology environment, will be more expensive but able to assure a more reliable platform that will appeal to the affluent masses;
• Google, along with other Android players, will offer a broader range of applications, customization, and lower prices, but at a cost of platform hiccups and a greater need for do-it-yourself fixes, which will appeal to techies and new entrants.

Hmmm. Sounds like Mac versus PC?

Many of us were pleased to see the Sprint-ClearWire deal announced last week. This is an important next step for the mobile internet (see my earlier post “In Search of Mobile Broadband Tipping Point for more information on drivers for growth in the mobile market).

One key in the Sprint-ClearWire deal is that each of the major players brings something valuable to the party:

• Sprint has plenty of spectrum, a national operation, and a customer base. And with their base wireless business in decline, they have a motivation to take some risks and try a new game.
• ClearWire has an established operation and the visionary mind of Craig McCaw. Craig is usually ahead of the industry in thinking about ways to meet customer needs in new ways, and drives technology choices rather than letting them drive him. He also knows how to make money on the way toward the vision.
• Google is visionary, supports open systems, and appears to understand the importance of the mobile internet.
• Comcast has a customer base and needs a “quadruple play” (TV + internet + telephony + mobile) asset.

Some of my predictions are:

• While WiMAX will be the lead technology, this team will be technology-agile if something better comes along or WiMAX falters.
• While there is initially much discussion about PC cards to connect laptops to the network, we will see more focus on mobile handsets featuring communications (telephone and written), games, media, browsing, and navigation services.
• Other companies are likely to join this consortium — including content providers and key application providers. They will want the favored position and insight gained from being a charter member.

What do you think might be coming based on this announcement?

Many have heard the story about Eskimos having 32 words for snow, given how important it is in their lives. Similarly, technology companies have many different classification for technology workers — from CTO to CIO, and from lead web developer to database architects. Most technology companies have a very clear idea about what these jobs entail and who qualifies for them.

But many technology company executives are lost when they set out to build a marketing department. When I ask them what flavor of CMO (chief marketing officer) they need, they often freeze up. And when I start to discuss the various roles that might fall under the CMO, they get confused. In many cases they believe that the CMO handles just advertising and public relations, while the technology groups do the product development and management. These beliefs are a leading reason why many technology companies hire their marketing team just before they launch, instead of realizing that hiring the right marketers at the start of the development effort might have targeted their products more effectively at customer needs.

In the interest of clarifying the picture, here is my basic list of marketing roles. I list them roughly from the most conceptual and strategic to the most operational. One person can perform more than one role, but generally the adjacent roles on this list group best together. (For a complete selection of articles on many of these roles and their unique challenges, see Crimson Consulting’s Insight page.)

• Marketing strategy - where (customers & products) and how (distinctive competence) to compete
• Business development - key strategic alliances, and channel partners
• Product:
  • Product/service strategy - what products/services to sell to which target customers with what value proposition
  • Product design and development - what features and functionality, design, packaging, etc.
  • Product management -what prices, discounts, bundles, etc. through which channels
• Channel:
  • Channel strategy - what sales and distribution channels to use to get to market
  • Channel program design and management - how to attract and manage the desired channel partners
• Marcom (short for marketing communications):
  • Brand strategy - what the brand should mean to customers and how to build that
  • Advertising and Promotion - what messages in which media choices
  • Public Relations - how to convey the right messages through news sources, spreading the good and limiting the bad news
  • Promotions and Events - what other means to get the products and services in front of customers
• Demand generation:
  • Campaign design and management - what is the best mix of promotional and sales campaigns
  • Direct Mail/Direct Response - managing one-to-one interactions with prospects and customers
  • Web design - best design and layout of the web site(s) to attract customers; optimization of search engines
  • Operations -managing the processes and logistics of the campaigns
• Customer Service:
  • Customer service strategy and policies - determine the nature of the ongoing relationship with customers
  • Call Center - manage the (inhouse or outsourced) telephone sales reps, email responders, click-to-chat teams
• Sales
  • Direct - manage the customer-facing (inside or outside) sales reps
  • Indirect - manage the distribution channels
  • Telemarketing - manage the (inhouse or outsourced) telephone reps who make sales.
  • Administration - ensure proper processing of all the orders

Some companies put all these roles under the CMO. Others divide the CMO role into several different senior roles along the lines of strategy, business development, product, marcom, customer service, and sales. Some look for generalist CMOs to “cover the waterfront” across these roles, while others look for CMOs with particular strengths along this continuum and then support that person’s weaker areas with key hires.

Regardless of the approach and organization strategy, it helps to think broadly about the important roles within the marketing function and the best way to get the work done.

The New York Times ran an interesting story about how the Apple iPhone is going to take a bite out of RIM Blackberry sales. I have credited RIM for doing an excellent job targeting the corporate market for email and PIM synch functions, while making the CIO comfortable about security. They opened up the corporate smartphone market with a head start on Microsoft’s Exchange offering.

However, as I pointed out in my blog “Enterprise Customers are People Too“, RIM may have squandered their lead by failing to innovate quickly. This article describes how they are stepping up to the challenge on device development. Where it falls short is to look at the entire “system”.

Smartphones are more than stand-alone devices. They are increasingly part of a broader system or network of computers, applications, and networks. RIM scored early wins by seeing how to incorporate a smartphone into a corporate network. Apple plans to match this by announcing that in June they will support Microsoft Exchange as well as offer corporate VPN and security features. I am still looking for evidence that RIM understands that when they add media functions (music, etc.) they need to understand that Apple has a lock on the iTunes application and many propriety playback devices.

I am a sample of one, but may represent many “corporate” users. I held off buying an iPhone, needing Outlook Exchange functionality, but will buy iPhone over Blackberry because of the way iTunes pulls down my favorite podcasts and because I have iTunes connectors in my cars.

More and more the tech community is becoming a large system in which devices, content, networks, and applications must “play well with others”.

As we conclude this series, we now will look at the art of selling into the mid-market.

6. Effective selling – Admittedly, it’s a massive challenge to align a Go-to-Market organization with the target customers and ecosystem of partners. Many large enterprise companies are very strong at having direct sales forces aligned on a one-to-one basis where they have a deep understanding of the account, a deep understanding of the industry and the core business processes. Hence, their solutions are clearly aligned with the customer’s business processes. Their organizations however are NOT aligned when they are in the one-to-many business model where the enterprise company doesn’t get to directly touch the customer – their ecosystem of partners evaluate customer needs, etc. However, this type of organizational transformation does not happen overnight. Software companies need to migrate from an organization designed to sell directly to large enterprises to a mix of direct and indirect sales, key account management and key partner management. Yet, there are very different organizational capabilities required to be in the business of direct selling vs. the business of partner management. This requires thought planning and balance to maintain the existing revenue stream from enterprise customers while nurturing the one-to-many partner relationships to effectively sell to the mid-market. (For more information on designing an effcient channel strategy, see The New Solution-Selling Paradigm).

When I finished my conversation with the enterprise software executive, we concluded that centralized, enterprise marketing organizations and consulting firms do indeed have a very difficult time understanding the complexities of marketing enterprise software to small- and mid-sized markets. Clearly categorizing those markets, effectively segmenting the mid-market customer, developing a clear “marketecture” of the partner ecosystem, creating clear business propositions to partners and effective value propositions to customers and, finally, wrapping these together with an effective mid-market selling machine, can go a long way to solve these challenges.