« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »

December 20, 2005

The Jobseeker of the Future...

In this great post by my friend Dave Lefkow at Jobster, my first Recruitment Marketing related post has been inspired.

The head of the interactive department in my company came to me a couple of weeks ago, asking me for some ideas on what the "market" has to say these days about interactive marketing. He and I share a common goal of aiming to be "thought leaders" in our field and hence are always trying to think beyond what's currently out there for the really big ideas that shape the future of recruiting. Dave makes a really great point in his post about getting away from planning based on "best practices" which I agree with and have often mentioned in my own presentations and discussions with clients. The ironic thing about most of the published best practices is that, as Dave says, they basically take a look at everything that everyone has been doing for the last umpteen years and highlights the 15 or 20 most successful tactics and then "they" declare that these are the best practices.

The problem with this approach is that it does not look forward, it looks backward... hence it's kind of counter-intuitive to use "best practices" as inspiration for your next big idea. Best practices are important in that they are the "price of admission" for success in many cases. For example, a recent article on ERExchange.com listed "easy to access job postings" as a "best practice " for your company's Employment web site. But who's honestly going to visit your site and go "Wow, these guys are on the cutting edge of recruiting technology! I was able to get to their job postings in one click!! Oh my god! John!! You HAVE TO SEE THIS!!" Conversely, if you didn't have easy to access job postings, it would significantly damage their experience of your site, because the average job-seeker has come to expect certain things of an employment site...

But that has nothing to do with innovation, does it? That's not going to push the industry forward at all. In fact, I've personally found it kind of ironic that the published lists of best practices for the recruitment industry, tend to come from companies with services or tools that serve the recruiting industry... and surprisingly enough, the "best practices" they espouse tend to very closely match their product or suite of services. (No disrespect meant to any of these authors or to their published ideas, just an observation.). Not to say they have an "ulterior motive" because I've never seen them put a "bad idea" out there as a best practice, but I've seen a few that I didn't think were very innovative.

I have often wanted to do what Dave Lefkow describes, sit down with some real "thinkers" and brainstorm really innovative ideas for the future of recruiting... where money and time were no object and we solved real problems without looking at the "best practices."

I tend to take my inspiration from outside of the online recruiting arena and so as I was brainstorming on the things that "the market" should be thinking about, I landed on a concept I took from "Boxes and Arrows" a great site covering a range of topics including Information Architecture, Experience Design or Interaction Design. There was a post on boxes and arrows by Jason Hobbs about "user journeys" that discussed how good interactive designers and strategists are thinking about a person's entire journey through a site (brand, ad campaign, etc) and thinking about how to best facilitate that experience into a mutually beneficial one - where every click leads to a deeper connection with the content and offers an opportunity to develop a more meaningful relationship with the user by appropriately channeling them through the process with relevant and timely information.

I realized that an important aspect of discovering innovative ways to connect companies with potential talent in this changing world lies in the ability to understand who today's jobseekers are and what the jobseeker's "journey to a new job" is like...

Now, I haven't personally sat down and created a user journey for a site before - so I don't claim to be an expert in this area - but I think that conceptually it could really help drive some new ideas.

Just thinking about today's "experienced professional" - these people are in their late 20s to early 30s with a few years of professional experience under their belts. They are probably likely to be single, so they have a decent amount of disposable income - which means that they have cars, electronic gadgets, high-speed wireless access and so on. The "best practice" approach tends to come from thinking about how all of these factors affect our ability to market what we have to say to them (we can determine that we can deliver a video to them using Flash because they are likely to have the ability to view a Flash movie)... but what about thinking about how they want to receive all of this information (when they are sitting at their computer, would they even be interested in watching a Flash movie or would that be an interruption to their normal way of doing things)? These people also have TiVo, so they don't watch TV like other people do. They have an iPod and may be downloading podcasts. They have a mobile phone that they send photos or small videos to their friends, they send and receive lots of text messages via their telephone and they are probably savvy enough to know how to filter out unwanted emails and pop-up adverstisements from appearing when they don't want to see them.

My point here is that jobseekers are changing. Example: Having a "job agent" feature on your site may seem like a really innovative idea, now people can sign up to receive emails from your site about jobs that match their criteria. But perhaps the person you're trying to hire has already figured out that "creating an agent" does not mean that they are going to be sent relevant job titles... and in fact, maybe they've gone away from it because their inbox was being clogged with emails from too many companies about available jobs. I have agents set up that I just delete the minute they hit my inbox. Now I prefer RSS feeds on my Yahoo! home page.

So perhaps it's time to think about all of the ways in which someone can manage their career in the "interactive age" and adjust our tactics to them instead of thinking of new twists on the same old "best practices."

A couple of concepts that interest me:

Tagging - What if someone could come to your site, look at your available jobs and then place them into their own (job-seeker oriented) categories. So now that Engineer II position is marked by someone as "great entry level opportunity" and that becomes a category that people can use to search for positions that you have available.
Industrial Psychology Based Assessments - I'm interested in this field for 2 reasons: 1) in a "candidate's market" which is where we're headed, people need to be convinced that you are the right environment for them... if you had an expert come in and help you characterize your work environment into information that you could use to help people determine if they are the right cultural fit before they apply and 2) doing this would also aid in retention because people would feel like they got what they signed up for...

I think that it'd be really cool to go to a site where you answered questions, played a game, or participated in some sort of interactive experience and at the end of it you were given feedback on whether or not you were the right match for company XXX. Or a job board that could help you identify companies that were a good match for your personality. All of the pieces are there, and some companies do some of it but nobody does all of it... and yet, if you think about today's professional and how they are using the Web to live their lives - they are all about technology that helps filter out stuff that wastes their time.

Hopefully this post hasn't wasted your time... what else can we do to improve online recruiting? I'm open to suggestions.

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 03:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Why Pandora is so cool...

Ok, I have now created a category called "Why Pandora is so cool" because I have been a Pandora fan for more than a week (long enough to validate my declaration that Pandora is official).

Read my Pandora post to see the genesis of this declaration. Pandora is an online music service that is designed to expose you to new music, based on your tastes. The online version of what happened when you met a friend of a friend that had some music in common with you, but then also had other stuff that you'd never heard and started sharing his/her music with you.

I am a father with a full-time job and a lot of hobbies on the side, music is one of my many great loves in life... but I have less and less time in my life to be exposed to new music... so I go to Pandora and I enter "Electric Relaxation" by a Tribe Called Quest and suddenly, a week and a half later I log in and "Heart of the City" by Rapper Big Pooh (of Little Brother) comes on, as part of a free playlist of music that costs me nothing to listen to from work.

So the "Why Pandora is so cool!" category is going to be full of posts about songs that come through that make me just go "Ohhh yAAAAAAAAH!!"

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 12:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 19, 2005

Interesting TiVo thought...

I was on the plane returning from a trip to Orlando (and boy what a trip that was), sitting next to a couple that were on a trip to Fiji and struck up a conversation. One thing led to another (and of course a couple of drinks) and we were all talking about what we do for a living... then a few minutes later, I'm spewing out stories about how the advertising and marketing world has been turned upside down by TiVo, TV series on DVD and the Internet - all of which have made it possible to receive content with little or no advertising. Next thing I know, the woman I was sitting next to made an interesting point that I just had to share.

She said that she had actually booked a recent trip to a certain hotel from having recalled their TV spot on TiVo. She was fast-forwarding the commercials and even at a sped-up rate with no audio, they had created a commercial memorable enough for her to follow up. She wanted to book her vacation and remembered that she had seen an ad during a recent showing of Will & Grace and was able to call up the ad on her TiVo and get the telephone number.

It touched off an interesting conversation that I thought should be put out there for people to think about (all 3 of the people that read this blog). Talk about a clear and concise brand message - how could your ad still be impactful if people are watching at three times the speed and don't have any sound.

I thought it'd be funny to create an ad that, when played at regular speed came across in slow-motion, but when fast-forwarded through TiVo actually made sense. Kind of like the old urban myths (are they urban myths) about playing records backwards and getting demonic message, or that movie theaters insert frames into the films that send subliminal messages to buy popcorn.

Maybe advertisers can salvage TV spots afterall...

I doubt there's a way to insert them into the DVDs, but this TiVo thing could be fun.

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 02:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 09, 2005

Cell Phone Ads... good or bad?

I saw this great article on MediaPost by Wendy Davis, which refers to a survey of college students asking them about receiving ads on their mobile phones.

The article had some great statistics in it and was relevant to a presentation I'm putting together for a client of mine on reaching the 18+ demographic with their advertising.

The general assumption when looking at data is that it is good to blast younger audiences with "high tech" advertising because they typically are more willing to and capable of receiving high tech ads. In this article, Wendy points out that younger audiences haven't been happy about being blasted with your ads on their cell phones and on MySpace and everything else (although they seem to mind less as time goes by).... That is, unless of course it comes with some sort of incentive. More than half (51%) of the 650+ students surveyed said they don't want ads on their cell phones, but could be persuaded... in exchange for something free.

When I was over in London last month, I was blown away by the number of ads for ring tones. (Most of them on MTV and other channels aimed at this younger demographic). Having the ability to personalize their phone is a really big deal. People could send a text message to a certain number, which billed them and then allowed them to download the ringtone to their computer. I also saw an ad on the tube for mobile videos that cost money. Without any statistics on how much money these companies are making, I can only assume that the presence of their ads on cable and on the trains means they are having some success... and glean from this that the younger audiences will pay money (or spend their parents' money) to customize their phones to their personality.

This also seems to be the case in Asia. I recently read (I'll find the link) that in Korea, for example something like 70% of homes have high-speed internet access at home and that a good portion of the population can be seen watching television on their phones on the way to work... and a good friend returned from Japan and told us about the cell phone shops over there and all of the accessories that everyone has for their phones. She bought a little "Hello Kitty" charm that hangs off her phone and said that everyone, even business men in suits, had similar phone accessories.

For whatever reason, America has been slow to adopt mobile technologies (and accessories) compared to our neighbors to the East and to the West... so perhaps we should be paying attention to how things are advancing in these markets... and focus on developing relevant content or incentives when we invade people's phones...

I think the trick will be to find out how to fit what you have to say into their way of life and/or give them something that they can then use as a form of expression about who they are... your brand becomes part of their brand...

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 11:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 08, 2005

podcast named Word of the Year...

In this announcement from MacDailyNews, we find out that the word podcast has been selected by the New Oxford American Dictionary as the "Word of the Year."

Chosen over such terms as reggaeton, bird flu and lifehack... the term podcast has been cemented into our culture.

If I'm not mistaken, last year's word was "blog"... proof of the impact of the ways in which the Internet and technology are shaping the world around us.

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 03:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Your Own Personalized Radio Station

Ok, I'm purely throwing this in here because I think that someone with an idea this cool deserves as much publicity and attention as they can get. I guess that's kind of my point in having a blog at all is to highlight the things I think are cool.

Pandora is an internet-based business designed to help music lovers stay in touch with music. You go to their site, enter the name of an artist or a song that you really love, their computer analyzes this artist and/or song against all sorts of criteria (everything from the timbre of the vocals, to the style of the guitar being played in the background and more) and put together a playlist (which they call for you of similar music that they think you'll love.

Today, I entered "Boogie on Reggae Woman" by Stevie Wonder. The first thing that Pandora did was to play "Happier Than the Morning Sun" by Stevie Wonder (they explained why they didn't give me the gratification of playing the song I wanted to hear... which I didn't read because I was over here typing my blog... but I do intend to question them on that... but only after I've judged their service after 10 hours of free music.

The things I already like... if for example a song makes it onto my radio station that I completely don't like, I can click to have it removed from my "station" and they will (hopefully) adjust their algorhythm to know that song was not a good connection (I'm not yet sure if they'll do this just for me or not or if it would happen globally).

(Second song "I've Made Love to You a Thousand Times" by Smokey Robinson - and again I missed their rationale for selecting it for me. But I think it's really cool that they do that.)

The other thing I really like about them is that they employ musicians (according the the article I read in Fast Company by Linda Tischler) to help them break down the music into "genomes." Someone actually gets paid to listen to thousands upon thousands of CDs (my dream job) and break the music down for the database.

(Third song "Jagger the Dagger" by Eugene McDaniels. Which was sampled by A Tribe Called Quest, making it doubly appropriate for my station).

The other thing I really like is their interface. Very user friendly...

Well worth checking out, already. I was just thinking that I am tired of all of the music I've loaded into my computer. It's all stuff I've owned for years and just ripped into iTunes so that I could have some stuff to bang at work while I do my job.

Some things for Pandora to think about... the one problem I have with digital music services is that they are all based on computers and/or iPods. One of the main places I listen to music is in the car. It's a proving ground for the music I make, and the best personal listening space I have. The other main place I listen to music is in my house. I wonder if Pandora could create relationships with a satellite radio service, making it possible for me to port their music into my car stereo (not that I have satellite radio, but it's an interesting thought). In essence, how do we get the music away from the computer????

Nonetheless, after only 12 minutes of listening, I'm already a huge fan. Thanks Pandora, keep up the good work!

Followup: How Pandora Picks songs

Ok... so I found in the Pandora interface that you can click on "Guide Us" and that's where you can choose the following:

"I love this song, play more like it"
"I don't like this song, don't play more like it"
"Why was this song chosen"
or
"I want to add more kinds of music to this station"

If you click on "Why was this song chosen" you can get that selection criteria I kept missing in my original post.

So for example, "Land of La La" by Stevie Wonder was selected for me because

"Based on what you've told us so far, we're playing this track because it features electronica influences, a subtle use of vocal harmony, repetetive melodic phrasing, groove based composition and techno synths."

Oh, and Pandora also features links to Amazon and iTunes music store if you want to buy the music.

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 10:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 07, 2005

Advertising School for Clients

The December 2005 issue of Fast Company had a great little tidbit I just read about Virginia Commonwealth University's Adcenter. A post-graduate school for those wanting to go into the ad business (run by Rick Boyko, a former chief creative officer from Ogilvy) that has placed an interesting twist on their curriculum. They are pairing coursework on the creative side of advertising with coursework on the marketing side of business. So in the same classroom you have people that want to be a future copywriter or art director sharing ideas and learning the same concepts as people that are going for their MBA.

As the article states, "the goal is to produce ad clients who regard creativity as more than an afterthought." A noble goal, especially from someone in the ad business who is a huge advocate of putting creativity first. I applaud this effort, but I wanted to point out from almost 10 years of working with "creatives" that this approach may have another compelling side-effect: creatives that understand business strategy and can use this understanding to improve their work and better communicate their world to their clients.

In my world, I am best when I work with a creative that actually understands the business world. I don't mean to offend my artist friends, be they art directors, designers, writers or anyone else with a "creative" role, but there are definitely two (or more) types of "creatives" in the professional world. On the flip side, I think I am successful because of my creative side and my ability to help my creative counterparts understand the clients business challenges, the audience's experience with the client's brand (or service or product) and how to package our ideas so that the client will feel comfortable moving forward. Some of it may be a talent that I possess, but some of it comes from understanding both sides of this coin.

I have had quite a few clients in my career that didn't really understand my business, especially the creative process itself. These clients tend to focus on things such as the price of the estimate you placed in front of them, rather than the work it represents. They focus on how long it's going to take before they have what they need, rather than how much effort you're going to put into doing a good job for them. These clients can be in the marketing department, human resources, or even senior management. Spending some time in a class that talked about "Creative Thinking" or "Cultural Exploration" or being forced to collaborate (rather than direct) with writers and designers would really benefit these people.

Too often, the decision to work with a team of creative professionals (advertising agency, design firm, ideation firm) is made based on their existing body of work, or a promise of when a particular task can be completed (or worse, how much it will cost) rather than if their approach is appropriate for your needs.

I'd love to find out long-term if this experimental curriculum really does produce better clients? Or better creatives for that matter. At the end of the day, it's always good to get people with different viewpoints in the same room and make them learn about each other. People that understand one another and respect one another make better families, better businesses, better partners and better clients.... and ultimately produce better results.

Posted by Andrew Spencer at 11:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack