Tag Archives: business

March 29, 2012 · 9:36 am

LCD

If you managed to get through middle school math (I’m hopeful that means most of you), you’re familiar with the term “Lowest Common Denominator.” In math it’s a way to combine unlike fractions by finding a common ground. In business, it’s a way to screw yourself up. You see, there’s another nonmathematic use of LCD and it refers to the lowest or least sophisticated level of something, and that’s the subject of today’s screed.

As anyone who has worked in broadcasting will tell you, the ratings system is a sort of shared myth. Nielsen puts out numbers, TV executives believe them and TV buyers believe the TV executives. Of course, it says right on the front of the ratings book that they’re only accurate up to a point, and like any number based on a sample the results are really a range. That range can be pretty wide as the number of folks in the sample who did something declines (so the published rating for American Idol is probably closer to the truth than the rating for a show ranked 125).

Which is why I find this disturbing:

TubeMogul is bringing Online Campaign Ratings to its RTB video ad platform. The agreement between TubeMogul and Nielsen means advertisers and agency trading desks can cross-reference GRPs for audience age and gender demographics with impressions and clicks to get a fuller sense of a campaign’s performance.

Simple announcement which a number of folks covered.  Except, of course, when one reads further:

While TubeMogul is able to relay metrics like impressions and clicks in real-time, Nielsen’s GRP numbers are only available daily, as with their broadcast GRP metrics. Also TubeMogul’s advertisers will have to log in to the Nielsen dashboard separately to view GRP numbers alongside metrics on TubeMogul’s platform.

In other words, we’re bringing down digital’s great system of non-sampled measurement to the LCD of TV.  That’s bad business in my book.  I realize that the advertising ecosystem isn’t quite able yet to deal with a completely different set of metrics, especially metrics presented in real-time, but the further we dumb down the standards the more likely it is that those lower standards become the norm instead of temporary fixes.

Digital measurement isn’t perfect.  Faulty implementations, disreputable folks cheating via bots and other ways, and an overwhleming amount of data we don’t often present well are issues.  But even with these and other faults the reporting and accuracy is better than what we used in TV, which any TV or agency person will tell you is pretty much a fantasy if you get them talking over a drink.

We can do better!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media

Tagged as , , , , , ,

March 26, 2012 · 10:13 am

Why Hiring A Star Might Be A Short-term Decision

Think about the best coaches, the ones who will go to their respective Halls Of Fame based on their coaching achievements.  Now think about players who are in their sport’s Hall.  The lists don’t often cross – in basketball there are only three: John Wooden, Bill Sharman, and Lenny Wilkens.  In golf, I can’t think of any Hall of Famers who were both great players and renowned teachers.  In the NFL, maybe Dick LeBeau will get there as a defensive innovator – he’s already in as a player – but that’s about it.  You can look up baseball and other sports – it’s not a long list anywhere.

The fact is that the best players are usually not the best coaches.  Most of the great coaches were average players during that aspect of their careers.  I played a lot of sports and was in the “average” category.  From my own experience I know that I had to pay a lot more attention to technique and strategy that the guys who had way more skill than I did, and I suspect that’s true (at a much higher level) with all of the great coaches.  As a mediocre golfer, I got better by practice (although I still am pretty bad) but also by learning about swing flaws, and now drive my friends nuts by analyzing every swing I make while they just swing and play pretty well.  Which of course got me thinking about how this is applicable to business.

The best salespeople I know were also notorious for not paying attention to “technique.”  They are just gifted in sales and lousy in things like administration and filing expense reports accurately and on time.  Great salespeople often make horrible sales managers because they can’t explain how to do what they do.  Ask an artist to explain the creative process and you get a very different answer from an academic.  The latter will talk about psychology and biology; the former about inspiration.

When someone know what it’s like not to have natural ability – the gift of superior skills – they work harder to become proficient.  They take nothing for granted.  So the question is this:  is it better to hire a naturally gifted star, knowing that they will at some point become frustrated in a larger role (the transition to management) or do we hire the person of above average skill who has worked hard just to compete?

Thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

March 23, 2012 · 6:52 am

More Doh!

A couple of Foodie Fridays ago, I wrote about a Cooking LIght piece that discussed some of the more common mistakes we amateur cooks make.  Since it’s Friday again (funny how that happens every week or so), I thought I’d present a few more lessons from the kitchen and remind us how what goes on in the kitchen is a lot like what goes on in business.

Today’s first mistake comes from the world of baking.  Unlike cooking, baking is very precise, mostly because it’s chemistry.  The problems come when untrained bakers begin to make substitutions in a baked good.  You know – something sounds too fattening (I hear that’s possible) so you change the butter to oil or applesauce.  Maybe you use a sugar substitute instead of some or all of the sugar.  That’s a noble idea but it disrupts the basic chemistry of the cake and it often comes out badly.  Business is a lot like that.  Some supervisors think that all their workers are interchangeable and ignore the basic chemistry of a good team.  Unfortunately, that kind of thinking often results in a less than optimal result.

Error number two is not understanding the difference between boiling and simmering.  Boiling something happens at a much higher heat than does simmering it gently.  While boiling rather than simmering can cook a dish more rapidly, the result is rarely edible.  Boiling a stew instead of simmering it can result in tough meat, for example.  In business, the equivalent error is yelling and screaming at someone – turning the heat way up – instead of applying a gentle heat that might take a bit longer to work but yields better results.

Finally, many home cooks don’t use thermometers to check the temperature of meat.  They rely on timing as stated in a recipe or some calculation like 6 minutes per pound instead of checking to see if the meat has come to a proper temperature.  This can result in a product that’s over- or under-cooked.  I know of people who don’t rely in measuring devices such as analytics to run their businesses and that’s the equivalent mistake.  There’s no way to tell how a business is doing – digital or otherwise – without using impartial measurements of some sort.  Just as a beautifully browned roast may not be cooked, a business that looks nice on the outside may not be fit for consumption once you dig in.

Enjoy the weekend!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Helpful Hints

Tagged as , , , , , ,