By now, I expect that you’ve heard about the viral video that has reinvigorated the Old Spice brand. I have to hand it to the ad agency Wieden & Kennedy for showing everyone that the adage “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again” works. According to Mashable, they reformulated and re-released the original video (initially produced in February) and developed almost 200 unique video responses to the social media buzz. These personalized videos generated even more buzz and eventually drove video views through roof.

Beyond the social media campaign, the video had an impact on search. According to Google, recent search requests for Old Spice eclipsed requests for leading brands such as Neutrogena and Gillette (see image below).

These results also impacted the bottom line. According to SymphonIRI “sales in this three-month range have increased by 95 percent over last year and Old Spice gained 2 percent in overall market share.” While the numbers are again impressive, it should be noted that P&G used coupons (such as BOGO, or Buy One Get One Free) to entice consumers to buy Old Spice. It seems that the videos made Old Spice come to the top of consumers minds while the coupons encourage consumers to buy it/try it out.

But once the campaign buzz and incentives are removed, the real question remains: how good is the Old Spice product? If the answer is that competing offerings are hands down better, the money that P&G spent might as well have just gone down the drain. Let’s hope that’s not the case.

Being in the service industry, I regularly read blogs about happenings in the business world. And every blue moon I get to read a good business book.

One book that I just finished reading is Delivering Happiness: A Path to Profits, Passion, and Purpose, written by Zappos.com CEO Tony Hsieh. The book chronicles Tony’s entrepreneurial journey from his first successful business where he sold mail-ordered button to the rise of Zappos.com and subsequent sale to Amazon. Throughout the book, Tony weaves in mini-lessons on what made things work (and what caused things to fail at times). Since the book is about delivering profits, passion, and purpose, I wanted to highlight a few lessons that struck a cord with me about running a business (or a team):

Lesson #1: Your business won’t survive without having positive cash flow.
It should come as no surprise that you cannot spend more than you collect. You may be able to float a few short periods of negative cash flow but in the long term your business must break even at the very least. To this point, learning to do more with less can help you stay in the black.

Lesson #2: Hire passionate people.
Building on lesson #1, cash helps you hire help. But when hiring, you must focus on your company’s culture! You may consider hiring talented individuals that bring new skills but unless they fit culturally (in other words, they’re looking to connect with your current employees on both a professional and personal level), you’ll see the negative impact of your decision on your culture, your customers and ultimately your business.

Lesson #3: Develop a shared company vision.
Again, building on lesson #2, it helps to hire passionate, like-minded, people. As the “tribe” leader, it is critical for you to organize employees so they cohesively work in support of your business goals. You’ll see amazing results when your employees work as a team and take risks to help the company reach/exceed its goals. But don’t forget the reward once your company reaches the goal. The absence of incentives, either tangible or intangible, will likely result in employees losing their drive over a period of time. Keep the passion burning by keeping your promise.

If you’re looking for a meaningful book about creating and managing a business with a purpose, then look no further than this book or check out the supporting blog.

Today, I ran the Windermere 5K in Cumming, GA. While I’ve run longer distances, I was nervous because I twisted my foot earlier in the week and thought that I’d have to skip the race altogether. Fortunately, I rested my foot over the past few days and felt comfortable giving the race a try.

I lined up at 7:30 am and anxiously waited to hear the announcer yell “go” to the crowd of 100+ runners. As soon as I heard the words, I quickly jumped to the front of the line but I quickly got this odd feeling as my heart started pounding at what felt like a 100 miles an hour. A good part of my nervousness was driven by my thoughts about foot — was it going to hurt or was it going to carry me through the race? Once I realized that my foot was solid, I focused on the run and stayed within my pace. And as I hit the first mile, I unexpectedly found myself outside of the pack for the first time. I realized how the pack helps me gauge my progress and pace. Being outside of the pack, I noticed that there was no real feedback so I decided to just go as fast as my body would take me.

I found the feeling of being out of the pack unusually exhilarating. I stayed focused — watching my pace and looking back every so often to determine if any other runners were catching up to me. Once I started climbing the final hill of the race, I noticed how my brain became poisoned with the idea of taking a short break but I immediately talked myself out of it. And as soon as the finish line was in sight, I picked up the pace and hurled my body over the line clocking in at 20:50 for a 3.1 mi run, my best time for a 5K.

And while I’m darn proud of my 7 minute per mile pace, I was actually more proud of the unexpected lesson that I learned today that is applicable to running as much as development and entrepreneurship: you shouldn’t be afraid of getting out of the pack. The course and goal remains the same so first focus on pulling away from your competition and then just go!

I recently upgraded my iPhone 3GS to the new iOS4. And after using it for the past 24 hours, I’ve found that it changed only a few things. Sorry Steve Jobs — it isn’t revolutionary! The primary change that I immediately liked is the folders or application organization capability but even that is limiting. The 5 screens of apps on my iPhone have been reduced down to only three. Unfortunately, folders can hold up to 12 applications at a time. With this design, a user doesn’t have to scroll to access more apps but it also means that the 16+ games that my boys play couldn’t fit nicely into their own little container. Granted, I have quite a bit more room to spare at the bottom of each application screen but things aren’t as tight as I wish that they could be.

Second, I learned that Pandora had to be upgraded in order for the “new” multitasking feature to work. As a fan of music, I’ve been using another application called Electric FM which allows me to listen to music in the background (as a stream within Safari) since February 2010. And there have been no freezes as recently reported by some iPhone users! So for me, multitasking really isn’t revolutionary. I guess that a side benefit of introducing this feature will be that some iPhone app developers will get called to upgrade their app and subsequently the iTunes app store will get refreshed.

My last disappointment about iOS4 is that iPhone 3GS owners don’t get to enjoy the new feature called FaceTime, which allows users to conduct video conferencing calls. Granted, marketers can’t really take advantage of this new feature but it is still cool in concept. FaceTime to me is evolutionary — it introduces an set up from a phone call — an untethered (but not to be confused with mobile) video conference for the masses, or so I thought. While my device is missing the rear facing camera, I expected my processor to be good enough to support the demands of this feature. I imagined that when I would engage in a FaceTime based conversation, I would be use only the forward facing camera on my iPhone 3GS which is no major loss. So I’m perplexed by Apple’s decision to not add this feature to my iOS 4 upgraded device. It definitely feels like Apple see me as a second class citizen unless it is a ploy to simply force convince me to buy the new iPhone 4. Really? It has had to come down to this arm twisting contest where I can only use the Knocking Live application?

The Atlanta office of Engauge is seeking a paid intern to work full-time from now until August 2010 to assist me, the VP of Technology, with emerging technology research/ideation, proof of concept development, code QA, and anything else that may arise.

If you are a prospective college graduate/recent graduate with a CS/IS degree or currently in between jobs, this is the perfect opportunity to learn about the delivery of technology to mid-size businesses and enterprises and the inter-workings of a digital agency. Qualifications that I’m looking for:

• Positive attitude
• Great verbal and written communication skills
• Exceptional analytical skills and an insatiable appetite to troubleshoot technology problems — big or small!
• Experience in Office Suite apps including Word and PowerPoint
• Strong organizational skills and attention to detail
• Working knowledge of HTML/JS/CSS/PHP or Web App Development using .NET/Java
• Working knowledge of web platforms (Content Management, eCommerce, Web Analytics, Social) a plus

If you’re interested, please provide me with your brief qualifications via the contact form. NOTE: Carpooling experience is not required!

Last year, Apple acquired streaming music service Lala.com. Lala was unique in that members could listen to new tracks in their entirety (iTunes only allows you to listen to a clip) and then purchase the rights to stream the song for pennies. Timing of the deal was suspicious as Apple swooped in just as Lala announced the pending approval of their iPhone app, which would allow members to access their music catalog via an iTouch or iPhone. While some question Apple’s motive to make the deal (because as a standalone service Lala would pose a competitive threat to iTunes), most expected to Apple bring Lala into the iTunes Store “fold” and give members a choice to either purchase music download or streaming rights.

Lala Shutdown Notice

Unfortunately, in Microsoft-esque style Apple has pulled an embrace, extend and extinguish move with Lala. According to an announcement on the Lala website, the service will shut down on May 31, 2010. Some sites, including Gizmodo, are already questioning if this move will be followed by the release of a streaming service within iTunes but most think not. As a fan of Apple, I just find it amusing that the company, who is at odd with Adobe because of Flash performance concerns (which are valid; see my prior post on HTML5 and Flash) may get a pass for exterminating a competing music service.

While I’m not about to call Apple evil, I think that it is time for other fans to admit that Apple is no different than Adobe or Microsoft — it is all about business!

Apple has decided to pick a fight with developers. In a recent change to the Terms of Service (TOS) for their new iPhone SDK, Apple has indicated that apps developed with third party software, such as MonoTouch, Titanium, or the upcoming version of Flash, will not be allowed. The new TOS also blocks the use of third-party analytics software, such as Flurry. The details of these changes are well documented by Joe Crawford and Erik Kerr. These changes basically mean that developing an iPhone app using a language other than the native iPhone language, Objective-C, or a C-based languages (C, C++), and collecting user data and device data is no longer allowed. NOTE: Some of the above companies believe that they are compliant with these changes and/or are actively seeking clarification from Apple (see Jeff Haynie’s blog post).

From my point of view, it will be incredibly disappointing for Apple to block apps developed with these third party platforms. While Apple claims that these platforms produce sub-par apps that violate user privacy, in truth they empower developers to create multi-platform applications using a single code base while tracking user behavior to better understand user needs. This kind of behavior by Apple seems downright anti-competitive, especially considering that Apple’s iPhones are in high demand. Some think that Apple is simply trying to ensure that their app store maintains its dominant position (credit to Raghu Kakarala). I’m of the opinion that Apple wants developers to get serious about Objective-C. The real benefit of this move is that these developers can create apps for the MacOS, not just the iPhone or iPad (or iTouch) and Apple can easily expand its reach.

While no can predict the future, I suspect that this move will backfire on Apple. In a recent report from AdMob, 70% of iPhone developers said that they were planning to code an app for Android but only 48% of Android developers plan to code for the iPhone. When considering the TOS changes and how Android development requires only HTML/CSS/JavaScript skills (basic web programming skills), I’m not expecting any attitudinal changes with iPhone developer. However, the number of Android developers that planned to develop for the iPhone will likely drop. NOTE: The survey is based on responses from about 100 developers which is a very small pool.

Apple is not the only company that realizes that it is all about developers. Microsoft did so years ago (see Steve Ballmer chanting “Developers, Developers, Developers” in video below). So the question remains — will Android developers agree to learn Objective-C or will they abandon the iPhone?

UPDATE: Hans Eckman pointed out that ZDNet had an article that indicated that Goggle is reaching out to iPhone developers to get them to port their apps to Android (source).

NOTE: Picture via TheiPhoneBlog.

I’m a big fan of TV comedies. One of my favorite new shows is Modern Family on ABC. The show focuses on the lives of three families; each episode typically has 3 story lines that are woven together. On last night’s episode (called Game Changer), one of the three story lines focused on the iPad. One of the main characters on the show, Phil, was planning to stand in line this Saturday to buy an iPad, the latest gadget from Apple. Since it was Phil’s birthday, his wife offered to stand in line for him but she fell back asleep, thus not making it to the Apple store in time. Eventually, the family figures out how to get Phil the iPad so all ends well. But during the closing scene, Phil proclaims his love for the iPad as his wife walks behind him, which she mistakenly takes as a complement for her.

As a technologist, I’m fascinated by how the writers took advantage of the well publicized iPad release event. The timeliness of this makes the show even more relevant and possibly makes fans of the show and Apple even more loyal. It’s also an amazing feat since writing the show’s script and producing it cannot be done overnight. Just goes to show how efficient we’ve become. Kudos to the show’s staff!

NOTE: Adage is reporting that Apple did not pay for the iPad placement in the Modern Family episode. (Thanks to Karna Crawford for that nugget of info).

The demise of Flash has been prognosticated ever since Steve Jobs showed off the new iPad and explained that Flash support is not planned for the device. Instead, Apple chose to go with HTML5. This sparked a debate battle between Flash and HTML5. From a technology point of view, Flash is behind the times (in the same way that Google Gears is behind the times) because the HTML5 technology solves the problem of having a separate application to support rich media. But from my perspective, the death of Flash will not be driven by technology alone.

For the non-technical person reading this post, rich media files are typically read or decoded by an external application that’s associated with your brower using a codec. With HTML5, the codec is directly embedded into the browser. This is smart approach because recent tests of HTML5 demonstrate that video playback requires fewer CPU cycles. And this translates to less expensive, longer-lasting netbooks and mobile devices since they require cheaper CPU’s or chips that consume less battery power. The downsides to this approach are a lack of support or even absence of a standard. NOTE: Internet Explorer, the most dominant browser, provided hints of HTML5/video support in a recent demo of IE9.

The reasons behind media killing Flash are based on the most recent developments in the advertising world. Several notable newspapers and magazines, including the Wall Street Journal, GQ and Men’s Health have planned to be available as digital editions when the device hits store shelves on April 3 (some are opting for special apps!). Interestingly, many of these magazines are reporting that advertisements for the premier issue have already sold out on the iPad. This is a first for traditional media to sell out of ads, who in 2009 lost 25% of page ads.

Flash is used primarily for advertising. Based on a survey by Mochi Media of 1,100 Flash developers, the majority of respondents, or 58 percent, indicated that they have advertisements within their Flash game. In fact, 2009 rich media ad spend in the US was at $2B – $3B dollars and trends indicate that rich media ad spending in 2010 will grow at a healthy clip of 5.5%. With that kind of budget, it is advertising that has the necessary financial backing to make an impact. Money talk, right?!

We’re already seeing some initial indication of what the future holds. On the video front, Brightcove released a solution this week to its Fortune 500 clients that allows for seamlessly conversion of Flash video to HTML5. Additionally, rich media ad platform Greystripe enables clients to convert existing Flash ads into the HTML5 format.

In my mind, this is the tip of the iceberg. As advertising agencies and companies turn to these offerings, Flash will become less and less necessary, and relevant.

As a technologist who’s focused on marketing, I love stats (short for statistics) because they help me tell a story. But as a former researcher, I’m very familiar with the famous quote by humorist Mark Twain:

“Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.”

At last night’s AiMA event on search engine strategies, the speakers referenced a study where users showed no significant preference to Bing or Google. After a short web search (via Google), I found the research paper by the Catalyst Group (see below). In the study, users reported that they wouldn’t switch from their current search engines even though Bing possessed some favorable improvements to Google.

While the findings attempted to explain how Bing will never catch up to Google, I was surprised that the speakers chose to quote the study as fact. There were two glaring issues that I immediately noticed once I located the study:

• The participants used Google as their main search engine.
• The study involved only 12 participants.

While some may argue that the opinion of the participants was tainted (since none used Microsoft Search as their primary search engine), I was even more surprised that no one considered the small participants pool. While I subscribe to the notion that we’re creatures of habit and users won’t change when they can’t find a significant value in the new “shinny object,” the bottom line is that the study’s findings are statistically invalid. While I’m fairly certain that the speakers were not aware of flaw in the study, it demonstrates how easy it is to rely on and propagate bad statistics and how careful marketers need to be when they quote a study.

NOTE: I recently wrote a blog post about Twitter data and Rapleaf based on an NPR radio bit. Rapleaf reached out and explained the issue with the misinformation that I had referenced. It goes to show that we’re all human; we make mistakes.

Catalyst Group Bing V. Google Usability Study