Category Archives: Helpful Hints

Taking An Unplayable

The things we learn from golf!  I know, I’ve written about that before, but yesterday’s conclusion to The Masters provided such a great example as to why the lesson of the golf course apply to the world of business.

I’m talking, of course, about Phil Mickelson‘s decision-making on number 4. For those of you who didn’t see or haven’t heard about it, Phil was at the top of the leader-board when he hit an errant shot on a par 3. His error was compounded by the fact that it hit a grandstand and bounced further away from the hole. In fact, it wound up in some thick brush. This piece provides a good overview.  For you non-golfers, when your ball winds up in a place like this, you can do one of four things:  Play the ball as it is or take a penalty stroke and use one of three options under the “unplayable lie” rule.  In Phil’s case, two of the three options weren’t available to him – it’s too long an explanation for this space – but the third one – replay the last shot from the previous spot certainly was.  That would have been back on the tee, hitting your third shot (on a par 3) into the green.

San Diego's favorite son pitches one of only a...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Phil elected to play the ball as it was and ended up making 6, and given where his ball was that was about as good a score as he could have expected.  His decision-making process is a great business example.  Phil elected not to cut his losses (take the penalty and start over) and I think it cost him the golf tournament.  This is the same guy who lost the U.S. Open a few years ago making exactly the same decision – try to hit an impossible shot instead of cutting your losses.  Obviously he won The Masters a couple of year back trying and making a difficult shot onto a par 5 from the trees (no, golf is not played in the woods – some of us just go there a lot).  In some ways, that just reinforced what is generally not the best course of action.

None of us like to admit that we need to take the hit and start over.  Most of us talk about “throwing good money after bad” as a negative.  The hard part is stepping back and assessing the situation without emotional involvement about all you’ve invested so far.  You need to build in decision points and discuss where you are with others and adjust the plan.  The caddy is out on the course not just to lug the golf bag and whether it’s in-house staff of consultants like me, someone needs to help make the decision to take the unplayable and live to fight another day.

What do you think?  How do you know when it’s time to go back to the tee or when trying to stick it out is the best course of action?

Enhanced by Zemanta

1 Comment

Filed under Helpful Hints

If An Ad Falls In The Forest…

comScore published the results of a study they did with a number of major advertisers on the subject of ad delivery.  While the study came out last week, it feels as if there is a bit of a drumbeat starting to happen and I thought I’d join the band (hey – we’re always out front here at the screed).  There is an excellent summary of the study on Exchange Wire and if you care to read the entire thing you can download it by clicking through here.  In brief, to get a better handle on the issues associated with display ad delivery and validation as well as to test-drive  comScore’s method for this validation called vCE, twelve leading marketers participated in a U.S.-based charter study, called the vCE Charter Study.

Image representing comScore as depicted in Cru...

Image via CrunchBase

The biggest point to come from the study, which seems to be the headline on the growing number of blog posts that reference it, is that 31% of ads delivered were never seen by a consumer.  It also called out that 72 percent of the campaigns studied had some ads running beside “unsafe” content as determined by the advertiser and that a small percentage (4%) of ads targeted to the US ran outside the country.

For a medium that touts itself as highly measurable and targeted, these aren’t great results.  Then again, none of the articles I’ve found put these numbers into any sort of context.  How does this compare to print, for example? As we’ve said before, stats by themselves are pretty meaningless unless you have something with which to compare them.  There is also an interesting nugget that surfaces about ads running lower on pages, or “below the fold.”  There is a common misperception that ads delivered “above-the-fold” are seen, while ads delivered “below-the-fold” are not.  Surprisingly, the findings demonstrate that some ads delivered “above-the-fold” were not seen because users quickly scrolled past them before the ad had a chance to load, and many ads placed “below-the-fold” delivered a high opportunity to be seen.  This might mean that inventory “below-the-fold” can be priced as premium as long as the publisher can prove it was viewed.

To me this all screams out for some human intervention.  Digital ad buying has become a mechanized world as one ad platform talks to another and humans stay out of the mix for the most part.  Buyers need to examine sites for more than their audiences.  Sellers need to pay attention to the analytics that show more than traffic but also “heat maps” of usage.  Both sides need to do a better job of quality control.  One can question comScore’s motives a bit since they’re also selling a delivery validation tool that will allow for both sides of the digital media equation to get more accurate numbers.  Commendable, I guess, but I wish there was some way to redo the numbers based on more human involvement as well as to compare the results with TV and print “opportunities to view.”

What are your thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta

1 Comment

Filed under digital media, Helpful Hints

By What Authority?

The word “authority” has may different meaning depending on context. It can mean “power.” It can mean “status.” It can come from a government or from a culture or from within. The kind I got to thinking about today is the kind that’s the kind one commands yet can’t demand.  I suppose some folks would call it credibilitybut I think it’s more than just that.  One can be a credible idiot – that doesn’t make an authoritative voice.

A segment of a social network

A segment of a social network (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I like this from the Wikipedia page:

Authority is an essential factor in the organisation of social life and regulates social control and social change. From a social-psychological standpoint, the use of authority is a type of social influence.

The above implies that authority comes from others – I guess that makes it a gift of sorts.  Then again, it’s basically knowing what you’re talking about, so maybe that’s a gift to others.  Either way, I think as professionals we all strive to be authoritative about something and as businesses we like to be seen as resources that speak in that same authoritative voice.

The real trick is not to pontificate (I can hear you laughing now…) but to listen and respond with useful, actionable information.  Yes, part of establishing my bona fides is part of why I blog each work day but I read thousands of more words each day than I write.  I try to learn from those I’ve found to be authorities on the many fields in which I work.  Great salespeople never “sell” but become the resources I mentioned.  We each have friends who are the “go to” people for movie or restaurant recommendations.

Establishing your authority is a critical part of growing as a business person, both in and out of the office.  What have you done today to boost yours?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Helpful Hints