Many companies, especially small business and startups, obsess about the amount of traffic to their site. Site traffic is important – it brings attention and the opportunity to convert visitors into users or paying customers. But traffic alone isn’t enough. In the following video, I offer three reasons why you should spend as much time focusing on your conversion efforts as you do focusing on your marketing and other traffic-generating efforts.
What do you think? Are conversions as important as traffic-generating efforts?
There’s a common misconception, especially among those interested in social media, about content and self-promotion. Some argue that people shouldn’t worry about self-promotion and shouldn’t attempt to promote their commercial activities.
This attitude has prompted some of the thoughtleaders of social media – those who share outstanding content day after day – to constantly defend their own activities that are, or could be perceived as, commercial in nature.
I was excited to see Chris Brogan, Darren Rowse, Brian Clark and Sonia Simone launch Third Tribe yesterday (I joined). I was unhappy to see that Chris included a few paragraphs for the “naysayers” – explaining why he was launching this new venture. Here’s what Chris wrote:
Any time I talk about money, I get a bunch of emails telling me that I’ve jumped the shark or that I’m a sellout. I did when we published Trust Agents. I did when I took my first affiliate ad for Thesis. I’ll just say my part about this up front, and you can blog whatever about it elsewhere.
The reason for building a membership forum site is that we can share information that we use for our businesses. It’s not what we want to post on our blogs. It’s something people are paying to learn and hopefully use for their own business efforts, and because of that, we think it’s of value. Don’t want it? Don’t buy it. I do plenty for free, and that’s still useful, too.
It’s not for everyone. It’s for those who want to step up their online marketing game.
Much of this damage has been caused by confusion over, and misunderstanding of, self-promotion. Everyone, whether they intend to or not, self-promotes.
Let me repeat that: everyone self-promotes.
Whether or not your online (or offline) activities support or are supported by commercial interests, you self-promote. When Marc Cuban writes in his blog, he self-promotes. He may not always intend to do so, but he does self-promote. Every time. So do I, whether I intend so or not. Sharing IS self-promotion.
Don Dodge, a Developer Advocate at Google (and before Google, a startup evangelist at Microsoft), wrote a fascinating post a few days ago about ways that Google measures success. In his post, Don talked about Google’s impossible goals:
Google sets impossible bodacious goals…and then achieves them. The engineering mindset of solving the impossible problem is part of the culture instilled in every group at Google… Most big companies set annual goals like improving or growing something by x%, and then measure performance once a year. At Google a year is like a decade. Annual goals aren’t good enough. Set quarterly goals, set them at impossible levels, and then figure out how to achieve them. Measure progress every quarter and reward outstanding achievement.
Don submitted his quarterly goals, focusing on aggressive but achievable goals. His manager said they weren’t good enough because “you can’t achieve amazing results by setting modest targets. We want amazing results. We want to tackle the impossible.”
I’ve been thinking about Don’s post for the past few days. I’ve always set impossible goals for myself – that’s one way I’ve been able to focus and grow – both intellectually and professionally. But while I’m comfortable setting impossible goals for myself, I’m wondering whether many companies could follow Google’s lead and ask their employees to set impossible goals.
Many employees would be uncomfortable with goals that appear unreachable. Based on many conversations with my employees, I understand that discomfort.The discomfort is not unreasonable – and it’s very rational.
If I had the choice, I would choose Google’s approach. I’d rather work with people who set impossible goals and achieve 65% of the impossible. Don Dodge is spot on – 65% of the impossible is, at least for me, better than 100% of the ordinary.
Yet most startups could not effectively emulate Google in setting impossible goals. Google brings many tangible and intangible factors to the table that allow Google to be different. Among many other factors, Google has huge cash reserves – it can weather failure. Google also pays huge rewards for success – so there’s a big reward for those who reach the impossible. Most startups simply aren’t built like that – they have limited funds and limited means to reward success.
But the fact that most startups are not able to emulate Google’s impossible goals culture shouldn’t push startups to focus only on achievable goals. Startups that don’t push their teams to excel are doomed to fail and are often overtaken by more nimble and aggressive competitors.
Rather than ask employees to be better than everybody else and to achieve impossible goals, smart startups could ask each employee to be better than the employee ever thought they could be. After all, the impossible is what nobody could do before someone does it.
Green initiatives are all around us – green building, agriculture, computing, design. But while more companies and people are doing more things, the needle is hardly moving. This is not surprising. The last several centuries – particularly the 20th – have promoted consumption as a key to a better life.
One reason that the needle is hardly moving: failure to change assumptions. Manufacturers continue to produce tons of products – with “Energy Star” or “green” labels on it. We’ve done little to alter our assumptions about consumption and as a result, it seems like we’re fighting a battle we cannot win.
Green initiatives must demonstrate efficacy and also must educate people and persuade them to sometimes spend MORE money, often for less. For every green business, there are dozens who don’t care much about being green. Those promoting green practices are starting to understand that real progress will require people to change their assumptions about consumption.
Startups can learn an important lesson from the public’s collective response to green initiatives: to change behavior, you sometimes have to change people’s assumptions. This is especially true for startups that are trying to get people to do something they’ve never done before. Before Twitter, most people would have said that it would be impossible and futile to attempt to converse in 140 character phrases. Twitter has succeeded, in part, by persuading people to change their assumptions about the length of communications.
It’s not enough to have a technically superior product. Betamax was technically superior to VHS. HD DVD was technically superior to Blue Ray. Consumers don’t always buy the best products – they purchase products they believe are best. Many consumers ignore organic foods because of price – despite the fact that they believe that organic foods are healthier. Solar energy has failed to gain acceptance except when the government heavily subsidizes the technology so that the price of solar is equal to or less than competing technologies.
It’s not easy to change assumptions. Companies that attempt to do so are seen by some as heretics. Apple is perhaps one of the best examples. Thousands of articles have been written during the past week about what’s NOT included in the upcoming iPad. People assume that because other manufacturers have included usb ports, cameras, and other bells & whistles on tablet PC’s, that the iPad should have all of those things too. But Apple has never followed – they’ve always led by asking their customers to change assumptions about how they would use their PC.
Remember when Apple removed the floppy disk from the iMac G3 in the late 1990s? Many people were shocked and it took nearly all other manufacturers another decade to start selling PCs without a floppy drive. By challenging assumptions and asking their customers to change their behavior (i.e. stop using floppies), Apple has continued to prosper and innovate.
Consider the products and services your company offers. Most companies compete solely based on price and/or features.
The smart companies…innovate by educating and helping to shape their customers’ assumptions. What are you doing to challenge YOUR customer’s assumptions?
Some of you have heard the term “agile software development”, which refers to a process of software development based on frequent, iterative development. crowdSPRING has been applying the principles of agile development to our own software development efforts for the past year.
We were bogged down throughout much of 2009 launching new products in part because our thinking was too grand. As a result, we ran into too many roadblocks that require further discussion, research, debate, and planning. This caused us to be less effective – and delayed product launches and improvements.
About six months ago, we looked at our non-software development processes (business, strategy, finance, etc.) and wondered why we also couldn’t apply many of the same principles (of agility) to those processes.If you read the Principles behind the Agile Manifesto, you quickly realize that the same principles can apply to many things outside of software development.
About 6 months ago, we started applying principles of agility to everything we do. This has helped us immensely to streamline our processes, to reach quicker decisions, and to iterate our policies and practices much quicker than we had done in the past. We see clear advantages to this approach – I discuss some of these advantages in the following video.
This is the fourth of my four part series, focusing on ways that startups, entrepreneurs and small businesses can work better with their lawyers.
Last week, a post on Venture Hacks briefly discussed the 10 reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers. I felt that post, while good, missed an opportunity to offer practical advice on what entrepreneurs and small business owners should do when working with lawyers. Many of these frustrations are fair, but you can take steps to improve your relationship with your lawyer – and more importantly, to find a lawyer you trust. In the video below, I discuss five things that entrepreneurs and small businesses can do to reduce their frustrations and to improve the relationship with their lawyers.
By way of background for those who don’t know me: prior to crowdSPRING, I practiced law for 13 years. During that time, I counseled and represented clients (from internet startups to Fortune 100 companies) in transactional matters and in complex trials. I’ve set at the table as a lawyer, and now have the perspective of an entrepreneur. Here we go (Part 4):
This is the third of a four part series, focusing on ways that startups, entrepreneurs and small businesses can work better with their lawyers.
Last week, a post on Venture Hacks briefly discussed the 10 reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers. I felt that post, while good, missed an opportunity to offer practical advice on what entrepreneurs and small business owners should do when working with lawyers.
Over the next two days (If you haven’t seen it, here are parts one and two of working with lawyers.), I’ll talk about how you can better work with your legal counsel and will suggest some strategies to help you find a good lawyer. I’ll use the Venture Hacks post as a guide. Every day, working backwards from reason 10, I’ll discuss three of the reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers (I’ll save the top reason for the last day).
By way of background for those who don’t know me: prior to crowdSPRING, I practiced law for 13 years. During that time, I counseled and represented clients (from internet startups to Fortune 100 companies) in transactional matters and in complex trials. I’ve set at the table as a lawyer, and now have the perspective of an entrepreneur. Here we go (Part 3):
This is the second of a four part series, focusing on ways that startups, entrepreneurs and small businesses can work better with their lawyers.
Last week, a post on Venture Hacks briefly discussed the 10 reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers. I felt that post, while good, missed an opportunity to offer practical advice on what entrepreneurs and small business owners should do when working with lawyers.
Over the next three days (If you haven’t seen it, here’s part 1 of working with lawyers.), I’ll talk about how you can better work with your legal counsel and will suggest some strategies to help you find a good lawyer. I’ll use the Venture Hacks post as a guide. Every day, working backwards from reason 10, I’ll discuss three of the reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers (I’ll save the top reason for the last day).
By way of background for those who don’t know me: prior to crowdSPRING, I practiced law for 13 years. During that time, I counseled and represented clients (from internet startups to Fortune 100 companies) in transactional matters and in complex trials. I’ve set at the table as a lawyer, and now have the perspective of an entrepreneur. Here we go (Part 2):
Last week, a post on Venture Hacks briefly discussed the 10 reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers. I felt that post, while good, missed an opportunity to offer practical advice on what entrepreneurs and small business owners should do when working with lawyers.
Over the next four days, I’ll talk about how you can better work with your legal counsel and will suggest some strategies to help you find a good lawyer. I’ll use the Venture Hacks post as a guide. Every day, working backwards from reason 10, I’ll discuss three of the reasons why entrepreneurs hate lawyers (I’ll save the top reason for the last day).
By way of background for those who don’t know me: prior to crowdSPRING, I practiced law for 13 years. During that time, I counseled and represented clients (from internet startups to Fortune 100 companies) in transactional matters and in complex trials. I’ve set at the table as a lawyer, and now have the perspective of an entrepreneur. Here we go:
I believe that it’s important for entrepreneurs to get their hands dirty by doing certain jobs before hiring people. Getting your hands dirty not only gives you a better perspective on the work that must be done, but also helps you contribute when your team’s capacity is stretched – as it often is at a startup. Moreover, most investors, and especially VCs, prefer to work with entrepreneurs who are not afraid to get their hands dirty. I discuss these issues in the following short video.
Ross is an entrepreneur. He co-founded crowdSPRING - the marketplace for creative services. For 13 years prior to crowdSPRING, Ross was a successful trial attorney. And yes - that is a puffer fish to the right.
subscribe via RSS
subscribe via e-mail
follow me on Twitter
find me on Linked-in
