SEO Werkt!

A short update I sent yesterday  sparked a small conversation on Twitter and inspired a blog post by Heather Rast, Market Where Your Audiences Are.

I tweeted this after receiving this text message from Jon Johnson, pastor of my church:

Please don’t forget this Sunday is Food Pantry Sunday. Food is running low and we need to restock. Please bring non-perishable foods this Sunday! You all are the best.

The intended recipient list for this text message was probably those of us in leadership known to prefer text messaging or Facebook updates to email. Note that two bits of information are carried in this short message: 1) a reminder of a church outreach that needs attention; and 2) five little words of encouragement: “You all are the best.”

If you don’t have a relationship with our pastor, those words might sound corny or even supercilious. But spend a short amount of time with the good reverend, and you’ll know just how genuine and heartfelt those words are — and therefore, how encouraging.

The Twitter responses and Heather’s blog post made me think of how churches, and other communities of faith, are using new media. Some, like LifeChurch, have thriving online communities and a full library of multimedia resources available for free. Others ignore social media altogether–and risk becoming irrelevant to younger members.

Most are probably like my church, somewhere in the middle. We have a Web presence–not what we’d like it to be yet, but it’s receiving great traffic–and we’re on Facebook. And now we have a pastor who sends text messages. Hurray!

Naturally, I’ve been lobbying for a greater social media presence for several years. We’re a small church and all our efforts are volunteer. But I’ve taught several people how to use WordPress, and I started the Facebook group three years ago–before fan pages existed. Now volunteers are maintaining the Web site and Facebook. Pastor Jon is great at engaging people in online discussions, and he recently learned how to Skype.

What is your church or community of faith doing with new media? Have you encouraged them to start using new communication tools? Better yet, have you volunteered to share your knowledge?

Sorry for the inconvenience. We recently moved to a new platform and thought all of our RSS subscribers canme over but, lo-and-behold, we were wrong! Here are the current RSS feeds for our sites:

• http://feeds.feedburner.com/socialmediatoday_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/theenergycollective_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/myventurepad_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/smartdatacollective_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/thesocialcustomer_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/thecustomercollective_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/governingpeople_allposts
• http://feeds.feedburner.com/sustainablecitiescollective_allposts

I was raised on General Motors cars; that was my father’s choice of wheels. My first car was a Cadillac–an 8-year-old one that my dad, an automobile dealer, bought for my 16th birthday. it was a behemoth V8 gas guzzler, and I loved to drive it. My current car is a 2002 Ford Focus wagon I bought when it had just over 20,000 miles. It happened to be the best car in my budget range when I went shopping, and it’s been an economic, efficient ride. I figure my late father would forgive me for venturing outside of the GM family.

I’ve been paying attention to Ford’s marketing and PR efforts since my friend Scott Monty was hired to lead their social media efforts. Scott was one of the first people I followed on Twitter, and I’ve had the privilege of meeting him in person a few times.

So I was really intrigued that Ford chose to reveal the new 2011 Explorer, not at a car show, but on Facebook, in conjunction with a live unveiling in Herald Square in New York City and in these additional locations: Toronto, Washington, DC, Miami, Chicago, Dearborn, Dallas, Denver, and Los Angeles.

Check out the Ford Explorer Facebook page, which served as the hub for all the day’s activities and a repository for the reveal videos. Scott was in New York, “manning the Interwebz” as he tweeted.

I watched a few of the videos and learned about the design and safety features of the new Explorer, including inflatable seatbelts for rear-seat passengers. That’s a great feature, and I hope it’s adopted by other automakers.

Oh, and I also registered in the sweepstakes drawing to win one of the new Explorers. Ford had announced that if they got at least 30,000 fans … er, “likes” … on the Facebook page, they would give away an Explorer. They went well over that mark last week, and the page now has over 53,000 likes.

It looks like nearly every post on the Facebook page has gotten over 100 comments, so there has been a lot of engagement with both fans and detractors. I’ll be curious to see reports on the results of the Facebook-driven launch.

What do you think about yesterday’s Explorer launch: was it simply social media hype, or does this signal a new type of interactive marketing event to not only reach but engage the masses?

Let me see if I can say this delicately. Although I think that every tweet from @pglyman is interesting and important, one of his tweets from the other day was especially interesting to me. Pete tweeted “I’ve been seeing the term Online Financial Management (OFM) used a lot these days. I like. Going to start using it more. Goes good w/ PFM.”

My comment back to Peter was that a number of folks that I’ve talked to recently use the label OFM to differentiate what they’re doing from PFM. Pete’s comment back was:

“PFM is limiting. The future of online banking is PFM, we just won’t call it that.”

Pete’s spot on: The future of online banking is PFM.

Problem is, there are a lot of people who think the future of PFM is online banking. And that’s not a good thing.

Picture a Maslow’s hierarchy of online banking: Towards the bottom of the pyramid is basic access to accounts: getting your account balances, transferring funds. Go another level up, and perhaps we can put online bill pay on that level. Other online services might be at another level up.

But until recently, that was as high as the pyramid went.  Banks (and CUs) have done a great job over the past 15 years of making it more convenient for customers to access their accounts and to transact, first online, and now using mobile devices. (I consider these “innovations” despite what my friend Brett King might say).

But more convenient access to accounts and transaction capability doesn’t mean banks and CUs have helped their customers make better financial decisions or improve how they manage their financial lives. (Yes, I know that there is plenty of financial educational material online. And if you can show me how that material has proven to be effective, I’m all ears).

By subsuming, co-mingling, or conglomerating PFM with what we’ve come to consider online banking is undermining the promise of PFM. That is: The promise to add more value to the bank customer relationship.

We could argue for a long time over what banks’ biggest problems are. From a retail banking perspective, I’d argue that there is a disconnect between what customers pay for and the value they receive. Paying overdraft fees, ATM fees, monthly fees for writing too many checks or using the branch too many times, doesn’t produce much value in the eyes of bank customers. (Do you hear consumers clamoring for the government to regulate Apple’s outrageous pricing for iPhones and iPads?).

PFM users say that PFM has helped them better manage their financial lives. And banks and credit unions believe that deploying PFM will help them better engage their customers/members and improve consumer perceptions of them.

So why would any bank or CU want to subsume PFM into online banking? There are a lot of butt-ugly online banking sites out there, why would any bank or CU want to dumb down a PFM offering to the level of their online banking offering?

I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be a single logon to both capabilities, but banks and CUs should be treating PFM as something different, something above and beyond what is offered today.

Problem is, today’s PFM tools don’t live up to this promise. Right now, they’re too narrowly focused on budgeting and expense categorization. But the future of PFM is a lot more exciting: Peer comparisons, mobile access, point of sale advice and recommendations, rewards program integration, etc.

The people that I’ve talked to who want to use the label OFM instead of PFM say it’s because they believe Personal implies consumer, and that by using the word Online, it’s more inclusive of small businesses.

This is silly. First off, did anybody ask small business owners if they feel that the PFM term implies something that isn’t relevant to them? Didn’t think so. Second, is there any generally accepted definition of PFM in the market? No. Quibbling over the label at this point in the development of PFM/OFM doesn’t move the ball forward.

Better to use that mental energy pushing PFM up the online banking hierarchy.

Please indulge this off-topic post. It’s an important day for me personally, World Sjogren’s Day.

Sjogren’s (pronounced “show-grins”) is a chronic autoimmune disorder that causes white blood cells to attack the body’s moisture-producing glands. Some four million Americans, 90 percent of them women, are living with Sjogren’s. I’m one of them.

There is no cure. Symptoms can range from mild to debilitating, and the best you can do is learn to manage them.

What’s it like living with Sjogren’s? Well, just imagine ….

• that you are constantly wiping grit from your eyes, and eye drops afford scant relief
• that you can’t swallow foods like crackers because you don’t have enough saliva
• that your dry mouth causes rapid tooth decay and you make frequent visits to the dentist
• that your dry nose predisposes you to sinus infections, nose bleeds and respiratory problems
• that no matter how much water you drink, you can’t replenish your body’s moisture
• that your skin is so dry you use night cream under your makeup
• that you feel constantly fatigued and the doctor simply chalks it up to depression
• that you have episodes of joint and muscle pain with no explanation
• that for days on end you feel as if you have the flu, except you don’t
• that you have good days and bad days, but you can’t predict when they’ll occur
• that you’re sent from doctor to doctor for more than a decade before being diagnosed, and even then specialists disagree with each other

I don’t have to imagine any of these things; I live them.

Yet I’m fortunate. Although this is a systemic disorder, none of my major organs have been affected. I’m still mobile, still able to work, and have never been hospitalized due to Sjogren’s.

Click the graphic below to enlarge; it’s from the Sjogren’s Syndrome Foundation site, where you’ll find much valuable information for patients and healthcare providers.

I’ve seen a number of blog posts recently about the credit union principles and the credit union “difference”. Josh Jones at CUNA, for example, expressed concern that:

“The credit union difference—our voluntary community involvement, commitment to financial education, service to the under-served, and so on—is becoming lost in the shuffle. The articles I’ve read tout credit unions’ better interest rates and lower fees. Yes, these are important selling points, but they’re not the only ones that motivate people to move their money or remain loyal. We can’t lose sight of our philosophical differences—either communicating them or operating by them—even though credit unions are enjoying large scale, positive exposure.”

Josh is correct that better rates and lower fees aren’t the only reasons why people move their money or stay loyal.

But it begs the question: To what extent do people move their move their money or become disloyal because they believe that their current provider doesn’t voluntarily get involved in the community, isn’t committed to financial education, doesn’t serve the under-served,  and so on?

In other words, to what extent does the credit union “difference” really play a part in a consumer’s decision to select a financial services provider?

For a prospective CU member, I have my doubts that it has much impact.

Prospective members are prospective members, broadly speaking, because they: 1) Want to move their money from existing account(s)/provider(s) to a new one, or 2) Have identified the need for a new account/product.

Regarding reason #1, what motivates someone to switch? Lots of reasons. Towards the top of the list: 1) Camel’s back-breaking bad service; 2) Poor product performance; and 3) Personal reasons (e.g., relocation).

It’s perfectly reasonable to think that there are people out there who don’t receive bad service from their bank, are satisfied with the rates/fees on their bank’s products, aren’t moving or experiencing other personal life changes — and still decide “I don’t like the way my bank does business and treats other people, and therefore I will seek out another institution.”

I don’t have the numbers to prove this assertion, but I don’t think that accounts for a lot of people in the US. (And I base that assertion on past market research that I’ve done).

Regarding reason #2, for better or worse, Americans don’t go into relationships with financial providers with the a priori intention or belief that they will do all their financial business with one provider or that they will stay with that provider for the rest of their life.

So when prospective members identify the need for a new account or product, what goes into their decision? Lots of things. Towards the top of the list: 1) Fees and rates; 2) Referrals/references; 3) Service experience (e.g., direct experience in the sales process); 4) Service reputation (e.g., not directly experienced, but perceived based on advertising, word of mouth, third-party rankings, etc.); 5) Perceived fit (i.e., is this a firm I’m comfortable doing business with?).

The credit union “difference” clearly impacts and influences perceptions regarding the last point on this list. But, it’s just one point among a number. And we could argue all day about how important any one of those reasons — or other reasons — are in shaping a prospective member’s decision.

For existing members making a decision on a new account/product, the “difference” may play a stronger role because the member is more likely to have either experienced the “difference” or not.

But let me ask you credit union folks a question:  Regarding the elements of the “difference”  – voluntary community involvement, commitment to financial education, service to the under-served, and so on — have you ever surveyed your members and asked them 1) How important are EACH of these things to you in selecting and staying with a financial provider? and 2) How well do we deliver on EACH of the elements of the credit union “difference”?

I may be wrong, but I’m betting that few credit unions have done that. (No, instead many waste their time with that stupid Net Promoter Score stuff).

(Notes to CUES and CUNA: A national survey of CU members that asks the questions I described above would be a great study for one of the two of you to initiate. And I’d be more than willing to work with you on it. And to CUNA: If you do conduct the study, and select one of my competitors to help you with it, I’m going to come out to Madison and kick your Wimpy-Wisconsin asses).

So let’s return to the key question here: What extent does the credit union “difference” really play a part in a consumer’s decision to select a financial services provider?

My take: Not as much as many credit union folks think it does.

Which isn’t to say that there isn’t a lot of value to the “difference”.  But this “difference” might be more valuable internally to a CU, than it is externally.

I’m reminded of something I think Jack Welch said. If I’m getting it right, he said the biggest value of GE’s advertising was improving the morale of employees.

The CU “difference” is similar in that regards. Even if it doesn’t influence prospective members to switch or choose, it gives CU employees something to believe in, something to strive for, and a purpose for what they’re doing.

And in no way do I mean to downplay that.

But as a marketing tool, I’m not convinced that the CU “difference” makes a difference.

I’ve known about this product for a few months and it’s such an exciting idea that it was hard keeping the secret. (But I did!)

As an Austinite since age 3, I’ve grown up in the shadow of the University of Texas tower. I’m also a UT graduate, and a lifelong Longhorns football fan.

So when I found out that the University had licensed a 1:400 scale-model replica of the iconic tower as a container for a bottled water product, I was “hooked” instantly.

It also did not surprise me that the brains behind this idea is Tim McClure, the “M” in Austin’s GSD&M ad agency and the man who created the “Don’t Mess with Texas” campaign — the most successful anti-litter campaign ever. In 2006, the famous battle cry was voted America’s Favorite Advertising Slogan.

Tim McClure, UT President William Powers Jr., and Steve Gurasich

The tagline for H2Orange (and don’t you just love the name?) is “Drink water. Bleed orange. Fund Scholarships.” Approximately 40 percent of the proceeds from bottled water sales will be used to fund scholarships, and the company hopes to create enough sales to fund $1 million in scholarships annually.

Other investors in the venture, University of Texas graduates all, are are golf legend Ben Crenshaw, business giant Red McCombs and former UT national championship quarterback James Street.

The 16.9-ounce water bottles will go on sale August 25, the first day of classes at UT. The suggested retail price of $1.19 to $1.49 is slightly more expensive than generic brands, but less than premium brands of bottled water.

Environmentalists will be pleased to note that the H2Orange tower bottle is 100 percent recyclable, and carbon credits have been purchased through Green Mountain Energy to offset any environmental impact from the manufacturing and transportation of the bottle. And the water? It’s collected from Texas rain water, and is purified and bottled in Texas.

Every Dot Connects’ long-time advisor and friend Brenda Thompson is handling publicity and media relations for the launch of H2Orange purified Texas water. For more information, contact Brenda Thompson Communications, (512) 461-5644, or email info@h2orange.com.

Facebook page: H2Orange – Drink water, bleed orange.™ Fund scholarships.

Austin American Statesman coverage: Fans who bleed orange can now drink orange

KVUE-TV video coverage: UT unveils H2Orange water to raise scholarship funds

From the ashes of the meltdown of the 2008 and 2009 world economy comes a number of group and local deal services targeting local-based retailers and the people that shop there. It is truly the marriage between three rising trends – e-commerce, localization and social networking – wrapped up in a discount envelope. I've had no fewer than ten people ask me about the comparative strength of these services – apparently many of their sales teams are pitching superiority in their proposals.

I'm of two minds here. On one side, this is a heck of a lot better than targeting discounts and coupons through newspaper from an effectiveness, from a tracking and from a pay-for-performance standpoint. As a client interested in ROI or a retailer counting their pennies, this type of service gets a lot closer to knowing which part of your marketing spend is effective. 

On the other side, I see a nation of retailers, from high end boutiques to low end discounters, training their clientele to shop based on price and ceding over their customer lists to others in the process. Is this just a better more contemporary, socialized version of the coupon that allows more real estate to promote your offering or is this the Walmartization of local merchant economy?

That economic and moral question aside, we have reviewed and rated 30 of the top deal services based on the following criteria:

        – User Experience (20 pts)

        – Quality of Deal (20 pts)

        – Differentiation of Offering (15 pts)

        – Design (15 pts)

        – Socialness (10 pts)

        – Breadth of Deals (10 pts)

        – Number of Cities/Places (10 pts)

We'll release our ratings next week but hopefully give their founders and executive staff a chance to provide additional thoughts and highlight their strengths on their group wares. I'll individually evaluate each site in follow up posts.

In the interim, here is our preliminary rating of their Twitter presence. Twitter IQ scores were given based on number of followers, quality and frequency of posts, depth of engagement and smart Twitter behaviour (response/promote ratios, central and city-based pages):

Congrats Gilt Groupe, Living Social, Team Buy and ScoutMob for passing our Twitter test with flying colours. Unfortunately Twitter socialness likely only counts for 3% of our total evaluation. For those who work at these companies, we'd love to evaluate your strengths firsthand, so drop us a line or leave a comment below.

We've also left 8 spots open for additions, so please provide us your best other group buying networks/websites for our total evaluation. Happy deals.