Measuring Up

This Apple is bittersweet

The holidays are over. And, it’s back to work as usual.

This holiday season was pretty typical for my family. My kids received lots of gifts. And as usual, they each fell head over heels in love with one specific present that they were longing for. They absolutely adore their new iPod Touchs. In fact, they jumped for joy the second they found theirs under our tree. Then, for the next three hours, my wife moaned and groaned with frustration.

You see, my wife attempted to set up iTunes libraries for each of my kids on our two computers. The problem (which shouldn’t really be one) is that each of us has existing accounts already on our respective computers. What happened next was actually sad. A seemingly routine task of loading up an iPod turned into one that erased some of my files, synched all of our downloaded music/videos over and over again on each other’s accounts, and ultimately, had my wife pulling her own hair out in utter contempt for Apple. Even the Apple Help Desk couldn’t make it work (she actually called on Christmas, but was automatically hung up on twice because no one was working that day). When she went to visit the Apple store at our local mall the next morning, they informed her that this is not their domain. So, it was back to the Apple Help Desk…or some other alternative.

Sometimes, “some other alternative” ends up being the better answer (though) because my wife’s friend Barrie was finally able to explain how each account now has to be operated manually when downloading any new purchases. Although the manual download takes an infinite more time (and patience) than the normal way, it’s critically important to each individual library, or my seven year old son could be stuck listening to Led Zeppelin and watching The Departed. Not good…

I don’t get Apple. On the one hand, this company is simply incredible from an innovation standpoint. It continually leads the market place by developing really cool and amazingly appealing products that consumers and businesses simply don’t want to live without. Then on the other, it baffles customers by creating mind boggling, backwards technology protocols that are so frustrating and completely unfriendly to consumers. It truly makes no sense.

Either Apple is purposely trying to make it difficult for any one computer to have more than one account, or the company simply doesn’t give a damn.  I thought about those theories and then decided to research a few blogs to find out if others are having the same issue and why they believe Apple allows it to happen.  What I found were dozens of posts from many Apple and iPod haters (I actually didn’t realize so many are so disgusted with the company). More to the point of this post, I read through a mish mash of various points of view which educated me some, but didn’t paint an either/or conclusion on why Apple does this. Instead, the truth lies somewhere within both my theories.

According to many, Apple just doesn’t care. It has a monopoly on this category (iPods). And therefore, it knows that these frustrations will not repel the masses from continually buying the next greatest versions when they come out. Others write about the more reasonable business rationale that Apple really doesn’t want its library content to be shared among family and friends (or it will lose money on sales). That’s why it is extremely difficult for families to successfully load more than one account on any given computer.

My guess is that the latter viewpoint is more realistic. But, either way it stinks.  Companies that sell products/technology which aren’t consumer friendly lose market share quickly when true competition begins to heat up in their industry. 2011 should be the year that Apple faces just this. Let’s see what happens…

Calling all employers- stay away from Germany!

Ever since I've been in the business world, Germany has been one of the worst countries for companies to do business in.

The labor laws are so egregiously one sided (supporting employee interests) that one has to wonder how companies there actually survive. I remember a few years ago when we actually looked at the possibility of opening up an office there. After a week of being educated, the decision to stay out became the easiest call in Peppercom's 15 year history.

Some reasons include the fact that there seems to be more holidays for employees throughout the year then actual days they are supposed to go to work. Paternity leave laws are also absurd in this land of high performance cars and great beer. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for giving new mothers as much time off as they need. But, if memory serves, fathers are also guaranteed upwards of a year off at half pay as well. And, their job has to be held open upon returning to the workforce as well. Come on... give me a break. That is a real unnecessary hardship for businesses (especially small ones).

And now, this latest news that employers cannot leverage some social media tools like Facebook to learn more about potential employees throughout the hiring process, just takes the cake.

Yes, we all understand why German society is so focused on pro-employee (or consumer) rights. When a culture goes through an event as monumental as the Holocaust, one can understand how it needs to stay committed to being at the other end of the human rights/privacy spectrum. Germany has done just that by demonstrating to the world that its people will be treated with the utmost care concerning any and all privacy and human rights issues. But, it's now 65 years later. I wonder if some of these laws/regulations actually make sense any more.

The Facebook law also makes me think that the arm of the German government which made this decision simply isn't in-tune with the transparently digital world we live in today. This ruling greatly handicaps businesses that need to compete with the best international companies in fast moving and ultra challenging marketplace environments. As an employer, we try to leverage every tool available to understand (as best as possible) whether a candidate's skill set and personality would match well with our culture and the services we provide. If a candidate uses Facebook and/or other social networking sites to showcase an irresponsible (or worse) behavior, then that person has tipped a key hand about himself.

Understanding all of this, it doesn't really matter though. The other reality is that Facebook has obvious privacy controls which don't let just anyone see a person's profile or page unless permission is granted.  So, even with these tools, it just isn't all that easy to leverage them by HR folks in the hiring process.

The plain reality (though) is that we don't need democratic governments imposing new, stringent laws that reign in transparency. Protecting employees/consumers' rights is a good thing. The German government should think about how to do this the right way in a modern 21st century open information architecture world.

The hand written note gets me every time

The other day, I received a hand written thank you note from a woman who interviewed for a Peppercom job a few days before. The content within the letter was well written, offering up any number of reasons why this candidate believed she could provide value to Peppercom. It also graciously thanked me for taking 45 minutes to sit with her and explain what our company is all about and where we are heading.

I thought it was a great thank you letter. But, I have to admit that “she had me at hello” (in this case, hello being the point where I opened up the envelope to see a handwritten note).  There’s just something so personalized that comes with this old fashioned correspondence. It tells the recipient that he/she is important enough to the sender that the extra time taken to write and mail this letter (versus a standard email) is well worth it.

This got me thinking about a larger subject related to job interviewing and how people start new jobs. Specifically, I started to reflect on some of the good and bad protocols that people follow (or disregard) when either coming into a company for the first time, or leaving it for another employer. Here are some random opinions I have based on my experiences as both an employee and employer.

Coming into a company

•    Always show you are enthusiastic about the job… even if you’re playing other options – This seems like common sense. But, because there are times when all firms in our industry are hunting for a specific type of expertise, some candidates are highly sought after and they end up having multiple job opportunities to choose from (or at least interview with). I’ve watched a few train wrecks occur where these individuals didn’t know how to handle this great demand for their services. Because of this, they came across as either arrogant, or simply indifferent to us when the offers were about to be extended. No employer wants to ever feel like a candidate isn’t completely enthusiastic about the position he/she is interviewing for and, in these cases, we were absolutely turned off when it happened. The irony is that when we rescinded our offers, the candidates were shocked, profusely apologized and, only then, demonstrated real passion for the jobs. Both were too little, too late.

•    When someone offers help, take it – When a new employees starts, it’s commonplace for other employees to offer help in answering any questions, pointing out systems or ways of operating and just navigating through the company. Sometimes, these gestures of good will are just that. But, the bottom line is that we all know how scary it can be to jump right into a new environment and be expected to understand the culture, rules of the game and how bosses, teams and co-workers operate.

Many new employees ask for help over the first couple of weeks, but then I find that slows down (or comes to a real halt) after that person reaches a comfort zone.  I always found that to be quite interesting because I think that asking for advice, real help or simply having conversations with other employees (especially higher-ups) is critical for an employee’s growth and ability to do his/her job well. When I was an employee (yes, I still remember those days), I would routinely plan to spend a few hours per week meeting with my boss, other senior people from different areas throughout the company and even the CEO (when possible). During these sessions, I’d ask a ton of questions about everything that I could to learn about the company I was employed by, my profession and a variety of other topics. I can’t even measure how valuable that was in making me a lot smarter to push my career forward.

Leaving a company

•    Your notice period means “still working hard” – How come most employees don’t understand this? Actually, I think they do. But, instead of caring about the fact that their employers expect them to keep producing during those two or three weeks before they leave, a bizarre near -sighted behavior takes over.  Many start coasting after a few days (after they resign) and don’t follow through on assignments or projects because their mind is clouded with visions of nirvana that they believe their new firm will bring (which we all know is never reality). The result is that these soon to be leaving employees really anger their teammates, bosses and just about everyone at the agency they are leaving. It’s really very simple. First of all, the employees are still being paid a salary, so they should work as diligently as they did before resigning. Secondly (and more importantly), their earlier near-sightedness really impacts their reputation. And, that will follow them throughout their career (which I’ll discuss in the next point).

•    A long career and a small industry – The reality is that most employees these days will have more than seven or eight different jobs over their career. If one believes in the theory that you’re only as good as your reputation allows you to be, then employees who are leaving a company need to understand that those relationships created in that job are vital to future job opportunities, potential new business and, of course, even the next place they will hang their hat. From a positive standpoint, keep in touch with those former peers from a networking standpoint. Believe me, it is important. And, on the other end, be careful about burning bridges because at some point in time, they will come back to haunt you.

Need to know when to say when

With more than 20 years under my belt serving clients, one would think I’d always know the right time to end a bad client relationship. But truth be told, I have to admit that isn’t always the case.

Don’t get me wrong. Typically, my instincts warn me long in advance of a problem situation. One can pretty easily sense when a chemistry problem exists, or a client is not operating on the same wavelength as the agency team, or when we just won’t be able to deliver what that client expects. The big challenge is knowing when to call it quits and then holding steady with that decision because the relationship has become too detrimental to the welfare of the agency. Even if it costs the agency a little extra fee in the end.

One of our client relationships recently came to an end in this exact way. Let’s call this company Client H (abbreviated for Client from Hell). We began this relationship over 18 months ago after winning a competitive pitch. Although the monthly fee was low, it didn’t matter. This is a cool company that needed both brand building and crisis management help and we were very excited to work with a smart CMO and his staff to help continue building their business. Everything was going well for the first 10-11 months. We created a much needed communications infrastructure to deal with crisis situations and improved on proactive media relations efforts for the company which generated even more strategic publicity to help its business efforts. Our client told us they were pleased and our team really enjoyed the account because there clearly was mutual respect for the work we did and the time we spent obtaining results.

Then, the bomb dropped. The CMO up and left for another job. And, within a month or two, a new CMO took his place. We weren’t sure what to expect with this new woman until our first phone call (one week into her new job) in which she clearly set out to show us that a new sheriff was now in town. She immediately started the call by saying that everything done or agreed to under her predecessor was now dead. And, she expected Peppercom to do double or even triple the current work load with no increase to our fee. When my colleague and I jumped in to tactfully protest, she didn’t care a lick and threw out a threat that her former agency would be happy to take the business on (and the work load she wanted done) for 25 percent less of our fee. Then, in a nasty tone, this CMO quickly cut our conversation off because she had to run to the airport. But, before she did, it was made clear to us that we needed to make ourselves available in two hours (when she had a free moment to spare) to continue the call so that my colleague and I could be abused more.

It’s a bad economy and no one wants to give up business now. But, no one is going to treat me or my agency like this. So, it took me less than 30 minutes (after I calmed down) to spit out a resignation letter to the CEO (who at that point I was working closely with.) In the letter, I clearly explained how we were being treated and how little our time (which is our product) is being respected by this new top marketing person. Of course, I copied the CMO as well. That was that... or so I thought.

It’s funny.  Only when you’re actually willing to push the eject button and resign a client relationship, does the client wake up and realize that he/she might have gone too far. This is exactly what happened with this nightmare CMO. I’m not sure whether the CEO yelled at her or whether she just never understood that her abusive tactics could push someone to say “I’m done with you.” But, within 30 minutes she was desperately trying to reach my colleague and me on our cell phones to patch up the relationship. We didn’t return the countless messages for a while (that was fun,) but when she finally reached us, all we heard from her was apology after apology. She promised to respect our time and even find us new budgets for extra work that needed to be done. After much cajoling and some begging, we agreed to work for Client H again.

Now, I didn’t fall off of a turnip truck yesterday. We knew that because I went around this new senior executive to her boss, she was going to resent us (big time). We also knew that once she proved herself, Client H might just secretly look for a new agency because of what we (err...I) did. Our hope (though), was that she would change (if only for a short time) so that we could continue to prove to her (and the CEO) just how good an agency we are. And, for about 3-4 months this strategy seemed to be working pretty well. Until, something changed (maybe she found a comfort zone) and this woman’s miserable personality resurfaced again.

Work was piled on with promises of added fees to support it. Yet, when those fees were about to be billed, she quickly rescinded those offers. (She lied). Her emails were curt and nasty. In one case, she actually mistakenly forwarded an email to one of our team members by accident. Within the chain of the email the woman had bashed us to colleagues for not being able to write a certain press release well (even though we never wrote the release). Overall, Client H was becoming the nightmare that we had hoped she wouldn’t. At that point, I should have known when to say when. But, I didn’t. Maybe I was too distracted with other accounts/business. Or, maybe I was hoping that things might just improve.

The reality is that I should have known better. Ironically, after our team worked painstaking hours on a project to deliver very high level results, I received the Agency Dear John letter that we were being terminated, with no explanation. Even though I knew why, I decided to push for a real explanation and called the CMO twice. (I actually wanted to calmly stand up for our agency and discuss the way we were treated.) True to her character, she never returned the call.  Most likely, she’s too busy beating up the new agency…

In the end, it’s so much better not working for Client H. Our people are relieved and they can spend time delivering results for other clients who actually care. That’s really what matters now. If there is any lesson learned here, I hope this experience ensures that the next time this type of situation manifests, my instincts will compel me to make and stay with a decision that is clearly the right one.

Put that in your pipe and chew it!

Yes, I realize that this headline is both foolish and a mixed metaphor. But, when I heard a Cleveland Cavaliers basketball player exclaim this line last night in an interview, I laughed so hard that I decided to write about it.

Professional athletes and their coaches (many of whom used to be professional athletes) are notorious for butchering metaphors, analogies and clichés in media interviews.  I’ll admit to flubbing a few of these well intentioned lines in my day, as well. But, some professional athletes are in an entirely different league when it comes to the succession of incongruous or ludicrous comparisons that come out of their mouths each and every day.  Here are a few of my favorites that I’ve recently heard:

-    “Left hand, right hand, it doesn’t matter. I’m amphibious” --  Professional basketball player
-    “Can’t let one bad apple spoil the whole ball of wax” – Professional baseball manager
-    “I don’t want to shoot my mouth in my foot, but those are games we can win” – Professional football player
-    “I can see the light at the end of the tightrope” – Former professional basketball player. Now team president.

What’s my point (you might be thinking)? I’ll tell you.

When athletes make the jump from amateur to professional levels these days, they have a thousand and one counselors/coaches/mentors available to them. These experts try to teach them everything  from how to save and invest their new found money (that is still a tricky one for many), to quickly become more mature and professional  in how they handle themselves in the public (off the field or court), to dealing with the mental and physical grind of long, tedious seasons that they’ve never experienced before. But, are they ever coached or provided any guidance on how to become better public speakers… especially during press interviews?

Probably not. And, this reality is a real mistake. When these celebrities come across so poorly in the public eye, it only reflects negatively on them. Sure, they might have high paying jobs now, but, on average, most will be looking for a new career in two to four years. Whether they want to use their notoriety to move into a public broadcasting job or something else, those who speak as if they are uneducated, will probably face much longer odds of ever landing that next job they really want. It also becomes problematic when that first “crisis” strikes and those naïve and often inarticulate athletes are now in a panic situation, but have never been properly trained on how to communicate beforehand.  Instead, irony hits hard after the crisis hits when dozens of “close confidants” come to their side, offering lots of advice on what to say and how to say it. Unfortunately at that point, it’s often too late.

This post keeps bringing me back to one of my favorite movies, Bull Durham. Remember when Kevin Costner’s character (Crash Davis) started to mentor “Meat” (the highly uncivilized pitching prodigy that Tim Robbins played). After Costner witnessed Meat’s horrendous interviewing skills, he said to him.”You’re gonna have to learn your clichés. You’re gonna have to study them. You’re gonna have to know them. They’re your friends. Write this down -- we gotta play it one day at a time.”

If only every professional athlete had his own Crash Davis, the sports world would be so much better off (at least better spoken).

Have you recently heard any mixed metaphors or just plain bad quotes that are hilarious? Would love to hear your thoughts.

Interviewing curriculum is now a must for college seniors

There are tens of thousands of graduates competing for far fewer jobs right now. As a favor to a few friends, I interviewed/met with three in the last week. All are very nice, smart and personable and graduated from good universities. None had any clue how to interview well.

That's a real problem.

Ok. I know what you could be thinking. Maybe they were just a little intimidated because of my position. That's duly noted. But, the main issue has little to do with jitters and entirely about what the focus of any interview really needs to be.

You see, my belief is that any interview with me needs to revolve mostly around, well.... me. That is, it should focus on the interviewee asking questions about Peppercom, Ed Moed, the world of PR and communications and anything else relevant to my professional life or what his/her job might be. Contrary to what most might think, I don't want to have to ask 25 questions about the candidate. No, instead I want the candidate to show me how smart he/she is by asking 25 intelligent questions about my business and firm so that I can see how savvy he/she is. This will truly create a natural dialogue with the candidate. When this happens (and it is rare), it demonstrates that this person really took the time to research what is important to me and to make sure that he/she really wants to stand out among competitors.

I'll never forget the best interview I ever participated in a few years back. It wasn't an easy interview because both Steve and I conducted it together (and we like to have fun at the expense of each candidate) with this woman who was interviewing for a management supervisor role here. She really surprised us by opening up the conversation with just how much she knew about Peppercom, our offerings, our philosophy and even the two of our blogs. It became a real ego trip for Steve when she asked very pointed questions about specific posts he wrote and created a very intelligent conversation about our beliefs in measurement, connecting PR to sales and a variety of other really topical subjects. After about 25 minutes, we were smitten and sold on her. We told our management team to offer her a job. I'm happy to say that she continues to be a real star at our company today.

I'd argue that in some ways the process for conducting a good interview is very similar to having a solid new business pitch. It should be about the prospect/interviewee in both cases. In new business, that means even if the prospect says he wants to hear all about your firm, the real truth is that he's got problems and wants to see if they can be solved by you. So, you better dig deep to uncover or understand those problems (versus just talking about yourself).

Having gone through this experience three times, made me think that our colleges and universities are not doing enough to train these graduates now. I know every school has career centers that offer tips, prepping and probably training. But, I wonder (especially in this day and age), if that's enough?

Just as students have to fulfill a certain requirement of math, English and/or science classes, schools should offer mandatory classes for seniors on the art of interviewing and how to create real dialogue with prospective employers. Learning how to network to find a job would also be a spot on course in this overly competitive environment.

Some colleges/universities might already be doing this. If so, congratulations. You are offering your real world bound students something that they absolutely need. Those that aren't should get with the times and change their ways.

AIG takes a "bath" on this one

Fact: The U.S. Government gave AIG an 85 billion dollar loan three weeks ago to keep the behemoth afloat.

Fact: One week later, top sales agents at the company went on a weeklong retreat at the luxurious St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, Ca. The agents wined, dined and were pampered non-stop. The total cost was $442,000. $150,000 of that bill was for food, while another $23,000 was spent on spa treatments.

What in the world could the executives in charge of this government expensed boondoggle have been thinking?

AIG’s public relations director said that this event had been scheduled last year. I'm sure he's telling the truth. You can't book this type of ultra-chic corporate getaway 30 or even 60 days ahead of time.

The point is, it doesn't matter. AIG and its employees had just gone through a life altering event. The company was on the precipice of imploding. Only a fast moving, extremely controversial life line thrown by the government at the last moment prevented this demise from happening. And, how does a company that is supposed to be appearing contrite and acting frugal with its new found billions in American tax dollars proceed? It screws up big time. Even if only for appearance sake, without a doubt this trip should have been canceled.

Let's be honest. Half a million bucks isn't an absurd amount of money. What's absurd though is that this otherwise small gaffe was revealed at the Congressional hearings yesterday for the entire world to learn about. Then, it was repeated by Senator Obama during the presidential debate last night. If Americans weren't mad as hell before for bailing out these "greedy, rich, playboys" on Wall Street, then they certainly will blow their tops after this nugget of news travels round and round the Internet.

With the current dour mood in DC, this is just the type of typically minor gaffe that could evolve into an entirely new crisis and push already negative perceptions of AIG and Wall Street over the edge. One thing is for sure, the clueless senior executive who was in charge of this expenditure will be falling on his/her sword shortly.

Lost in translation

I’ve been traveling abroad this week meeting with seven different public relations/communications partners (among others) who represent different countries and regions in Asia. Each country has its own customs, traditions and formalities. And, as you can imagine, it was a little nerve-wracking as I prepared my thoughts/presentations thinking about important cultural nuances such as what might generate enthusiasm from a Vietnamese business executive versus one from China. Or, how I should present (and how vocal should I be) when discussing our partnership needs with a Philippine business owner versus one from Hong Kong.

Ironically, those potential land mines haven’t really been much of an issue. So far, everything has gone well. That is, except for the fact that I never really gave much thought to something much more important and critical to every day conversations. I know it sounds obvious, but in almost any discussion we use dozens of clichés and “industry lingo” to make points. I never realized just how much a part of my vocabulary these “Americanized phrases” are until I found myself stumbling (and bumbling) through a few of them attempting to communicate to our partners. Of course, most of our partners speak very limited English (thankfully their comprehension of my language is better than mine of theirs or we would have been doing a lot of nodding). More to the point of this post, I found that I had to work extra hard to further define the clichés (think about how you would explain “media by the pound’ or “pay for play”) I had just uttered in these meetings… and that quickly took me out of my rhythm. Even worse, some of the clichés could be considered quite offensive… as I soon found out.

What goes around, definitely comes around

Insecurity manifests itself in the worst of ways.

After almost 20 years in this business, I’m still amazed to witness so many negative forms of human nature emerge when people are insecure. Unfortunately, when you’re in the client serving business, it almost always comes from the people whom you serve.

Take one company we used to represent. It’s a big multi-national organization where 5-6 mid to senior level cronies have the exact same style and attitudes. They all completely ignored any and all requests for information that could have helped us do our job, but then slam work (and unrealistic expectations) down our throats at the last minute because it made them feel good. No questions were allowed to be asked, no push back was accepted. It didn't even matter if the client was ordering something that clearly was about to create a dire consequence. That was just a terrible relationship... good riddance to them.

Another ex client used to lob some of the nastiest verbal assaults for no reason on unsuspecting account executives. Then, when this wicked witch of the west needed something urgently because she screwed up, she was as sweet as pie. It was so transparent and sometimes we had a hard time believing that her persona didn't get her fired (actually, it ultimately did).

So, these stories sound like sour grapes, right? Maybe they do. But, my rationale for posting them is more about why it happens and what these professionals just don't seem to comprehend (versus bitching and moaning).

How does a PR guy get into the New York Times?

He needs to ban any after work use of CrackBerrys (uh…that’s BlackBerrys) from his company. Because, that's clearly big time news.

Yup. That’s just what the CEO of a Chicago-based PR firm called Empower recently did. He set a bold mandate within his company against using these addictive mobile communication devices (outside of work) and believes it has helped to improve both his business and relationship with wife and kids. Read yesterday's New York Times article to get the total story.

Being in a similar position (to this CEO), I can empathize and am often conflicted about how my BlackBerry tends to control me (versus the other way around). On the one hand, it does make me more efficient and provide greater ease in how I communicate. The latest 8800 model (sorry, but this isn't meant to be a plug) is an all purpose "Swiss Army knife" like device. Now I have one PDA for phone, a great device to roam the internet and, of, course... there's that immediate email gratification.

My greatest need for these efficiencies comes with the requirement to communicate with two offices (London and San Francisco) where Peppercommers don't start or end the day when the main NYC office does. Does it help to better serve clients as well? Sure. But, I find the most important benefits are definitely internal.