I am currently reading The Trust Prescription for Healthcare.   In this book, David Shore, an associate dean at the Harvard School of Public Health, outlines the importance of trust for the healthcare consumer.  He discusses how the concept of trust is important not only in the physician-patient relationship, but also in the relationships held between patients and healthcare organizations. 

I like the first sentence of Shore's book:  "Trust is the currency of all commerce."  It is.

There are many studies that show that consumers are more likely to do business with companies that they trust.  And you need only to read any one of Thomas Friedman's books to see how a lack of trust (often brought on by corruption) has kept many countries from realizing their commercial potential.

But the relationship between trust and healthcare is unique.  As a patient, trust is vitally important because we are extremely vulnerable when we engage with the players in the healthcare system.  We rely on the intelligence, training and good judgment of others to provide advice, keep us healthy, and get us better when we become ill or require treatment.

In that regard, we often have vivid memories of the times where trust has been violated.  I can think of two examples in particular from my life where trust in a clinician was compromised. 

The first example revolved around my childhood dentist.  He was a big guy, probably in his early 50s.  He had a good demeanor and always asked me about school and sports.  But he had horrible teeth and bad breath.  I was only about ten years old at the time, but still savvy enough to think to myself "should I really listen to a guy about dental care if he doesn't seem to practice good oral hygiene himself?"

The second example revolves around a General Practitioner of mine.  During my annual physical, I was going over a list of questions I had written down about my general health - should I worry about this mole? What about my family's history of heart disease?, etc.   After each question he gave what I considered an intelligent, reasoned response. 

After one question, though, his reaction was very different.  He said to me in an extremely condescending tone "Why are you asking me that?  I'm not the person to talk to about that - you would need a specialist for that."  I won't divulge what my question was (for fear of committing my own, personal HIPAA violation), but he certainly should have addressed my question, and in a much more patient-friendly tone.

Back to the concept of trust and commerce.  As a ten year old boy, I had little influence on what dentist our family went to.  But as an adult living in one of the most respected healthcare environments in the world, I certainly had the power to reduce the ranks of this guy's practice.  Not only did I find a new doctor, but a friend of mine stopped seeing him based at least in part on hearing my story.

I would give David Shore's book a try.  The public's trust in medicine has decreased tremendously in the last forty years and this has a wide-ranging implications for those of us that work in, or for, healthcare-related organizations. 

And while the idea that trust as a crucial element of healthcare is not novel, I think the power of this book relies on the depth of knowledge that Shore brings to this topic as well as the real world examples he provides.  And I am sure that, like me, soon after you begin reading this book you will begin to revisit those positive and negative experiences you have had in dealing with the healthcare system.

Posted by Jim Porter at 04:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There's a great movie line toward the end of Stand by Me.  After sharing a life-changing experience with a small group of friends as a boy, the film's narrator looks back as an adult and sadly realizes "Friends come in and out of our lives like busboys in a restaurant." The same can be said for digital marketing technology companies. Which is why Oddcast is so amazing. They're still here.

In relative web terms Oddcast is ancient. Heck, they've been around since 1999. But every time they start to show signs of aging, they do a simple click and tuck and voila – good as new. These are the same folks who have brought you everything from Careerbuilder's monk-e-mail to last holiday's Santa Swing for Everyclick.  And lots of talking avatars in between. 

Recently I received yet another viral Oddcast creation in my email. This time it was a promotion for Tide-to-Go Instant Stain Remover. And of course I clicked.  What I found was a delightful, integrated execution that tied (pun intended) beautifully to the current Tide talking stain TV spots. The site lets you upload your own photo so that you appear in the ad as the talking stain. Very clever. Very simple. Very viral.

So I got to thinking. What is it that keeps attracting me and millions of others to these talking avatars?  

The answer is just a few sentences back. It's simple. But of course it's more than that. Jason Bedell in a recent blog has a theory that builds on simplicity. He's added two more "s" words: socialable and shareable. By socialiable he means making the experience something that can be personalized then shared. Makes sense to me.

Oddcast has done something else along the way. They've taken one simple idea and diversified their product offering. What started out as a pretty cool but goofy time waster on the web has turned into a virtual industry. Now they've got three different platforms aimed at three different segments.  

Oddcast delivers avatars for enterprise level businesses. Sitepal make it easy for smaller business to add avatars to their sites to enhance customer service and sales. And Voki is designed for consumers who want to create avatars and share them with friends. And because these products are Web-based they can be delivered to any device including browsers, mobile devices, Radio and TV. 

To be honest, as much as I like Oddcast (and I do), I thought the fascination with talking avatars would have peaked long ago. But I underestimated the power of the "three s's."

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to create an avatar of myself to help finish a few writing deadlines.
 

Posted by Steve Lynch at 02:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Why would companies want to start using Internet TV for their business? Maybe because Internet TV offers one of the most compelling, yet untapped channels (no pun intended) for marketers. Maybe because it offers endless opportunities for a company to promote its products, services *and* culture. Maybe because it engages audiences and creates viral opportunities unmatched by other content options -- online or offline. Maybe because businesses don't want to feel the same loss about .tv as they did about .com 10 years ago when they failed to understand its value.

Many businesses today are wandering around the ether trying to understand the best way to create, publish and distribute rich content. The good news is several great companies are working hard behind the scenes to build on-demand, Internet TV platforms. Let's take a closer look at what it would take to build a new channel for our business using the Brightcove platform.

I begin by creating an account. It's easy enough as I provide some basic information and work my way into the console. I am even more impressed as I half expect my phone to start ringing with an eager Brightcove representative on the other end looking to solicit my business -- my phone doesn't ring.

As I look for the big red easy button, I notice that Brightcove offers a new publishpod. This is a desktop application that allows me to encode and upload numerous types of video assets. I find a quicktime of one of the company's principles (who better) and I watch Tom go from my desktop to my asset area -- fully encoded! There are also some great features in the Asset area that allow me to capture and crop images right from my video for use in publishing. 

Next, it's onto "Titles" as I combine my video with some of the images I created in the "Assets" area. Moving from one area to another is simple as the interface offers a tabular-based, RIA workflow that allows me to polish my video creation. I skip "Lineups" (a great way to organize videos by genre for use in a multi-player experience) and head right to "Players." This is where the fun really begins. I can promote my player through search engines and video portals, choose a player template, apply a style, preview, and than determine if I want it to play through a Brightcove URL or one of my own.  

Finally, I configure my syndication settings allowing other sites to play my video. The video is ready for streaming and the results of my efforts are below. As you play the video, notice the player features that are available including email, get link and menu!

Life through a browser has never been better. Build a channel today!

Posted by Jim Burke at 02:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Ernie Schenck's blogs is one of my favorites in the industry. He recently blogged about an interactive outdoor board promoting A&E’s new series Paranormal State.

This particular outdoor board went way beyond traditional two-dimensional messaging by actually transmitting

"voices" from the roof of the building using beam sound technology know as  Audio Spot Light.  It made for quite the unnerving experience. It's also a great example of taking traditional media and reinventing it.

We're seeing more and more of these new executions in order to get the attention of a public with the decreasing attention span. And I have to confess; this kind of stuff is one of my guilty pleasures. 

Reports are now showing out-of-home to be a rapidly growing and effective channel, despite all the talk about it being a "dying medium." Check out these historic figures on outdoor expenditure from the Outdoor Adverstising Association of America.  There is even an international advertising competion dedicated to ourdoor advertising exclusively.  

Still not convinced?  

Senior Analyst at eMarketer, Ben Macklin, describes the reinvention of outdoor advertising as a medium that's "experiencing a new lease on life as a result of emerging digital, video and wireless technologies."

Here some more numbers. According to eMarketer, total US outdoor video advertising spending will grow from $ 1.3 billion in 2007 to $2.3billion by 2011. The overall US outdoor advertising revenue is predicted to rise from $6.8 billion in 2006 to $10.2 billion 2011.

Whatever you call it, outdoor or out-of-home, it is clear that this advertising medium is far from traditional, with an advent of new technologies and a little creativity. All providing more and more targeted messaging to the intended audience. Kind of reminds me of the future as displayed in the movie The Minority Report or Bladerunner. Well, maybe not exactly, but you get the idea.

So is the Paranormal State billboard a gimmick or a great idea? Is it too intrusive or just fun? That's up for discussion, though at least the execution has a conceptual connection with the theme of the show. And I guess it did stop some passers by, though maybe, they were just hearing voices.

What do you think? Voices welcome. 

Posted by Anthony Henriques at 04:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In most Enterprise technology firms, Account Based Marketing (ABM) is often marketing in name alone. In the typical sales and marketing church-and-state environment, ABM seems to be falling most often on the sales side of the fence and used to augment the key account planning function.

Many CMOs are fine with this arrangement. After all, the skill set required, half inside sales/half research person isn't readily available in most marketing departments. Let the sales team handle it and there will be one less turf war to fight over and one less thing to worry about, right?

So, why should marketing get involved in Account Based Marketing?

Account Based Marketing is typically reserved for the largest 5% of your prospect base, the whales or the elephants, which in some categories represent more than 50% of the potential revenue. Landing one of these prospects will make your quarterly revenue number in one fell swoop.

Guess who is the most important target of your marketing efforts? The exact same prospects.

And what do you think will be the single biggest influence on their perception and consideration of your brand and offering? With apologies to your advertising, PR and event budgets, without a doubt, the ABM efforts.

Case in point: If your desired brand attributes are innovation and thought leadership, but your ABM efforts focus on reliability and value, guess what is going to show up on your next brand tracking study? A giant gap with your most important audience.

So how can this be avoided?

At the very least, marketing should work with the ABM teams to ensure the corporate brand is infused into the overall efforts. Message maps to drive each conversation will at least ensure alignment is achieved.

However, ideally marketing should control this function. It is a terrific way to build a better relationship with sales and have a major and easily demonstrable impact on company revenue.

And if you need another more selfish reason, ABM works and budgets are going up. According to ITSMA's State of the Marketing Profession Address, ABM budgets are going to increase almost 50% in 2008, an almost 250% increase since 2006. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any part of your budget that's experienced that type of growth. And since there is only so much marketing budget to go around, chances are that growth may actually be at your expense. 

So the choice is simple, embrace Account Based Marketing and increase your staffing, budget and stature. Or let someone else do it and take your chances. I'd recommend the former.

Posted by Doug Fox at 03:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was reading an interesting article the other day in the MIT Sloan Management Review (Winter 2008 issue), titled The Six Key Dimensions of Understanding Media.  In this article, the authors discusses the use of The Genre Model to describe and evaluate the transition from one type of communication to another.  The general illustrations are historical (e.g. business letter --> memo --> email), but one can quickly see how this model can be used to evaluate new and emerging types of communication or media (e.g. email --> blogging --> micro-blogging). 

Given the host of new technologies and media options available with Web 2.0, I highly recommend this article for an analytical method of evaluating and or considering the adoption of new technologies or new media in your corporate culture.  It includes some great examples (IBM Blog Central and MNI Partners’ adoption of Skype) about how real companies are utilizing these new technologies and truly reaping the benefits.  But, in addition, I’d also like to borrow The Genre Model and suggest that we could apply it to the measurement realm.  

In today’s business, there is a multitude of metrics for every aspect of our existence, and more metrics are developed each day!  How are we supposed to know which ones are important?  Which ones will help us grow or improve our business?  How do we select on which metrics to concentrate?  I propose that we use The Genre Model to help evaluate how a new metric may fit in, complement, or supplement our existing metrics. 

Let’s face it, not all metrics are universal.  Every company has a bevy of metrics to guide the business and help explain performance.  Many of these metrics are relevant to different parts of the business.  In other words, not all metrics are of the same value to everyone in the company, because they may not be applicable, or actionable.  In fact, not all metrics in a company are even appropriate for general consumption.  So, how do we decide to create and adopt new metrics?

Let’s take a look at how the six dimensions of The Genre Model could be employed in the area of metrics. When considering the adoption of a new metric, one should probably ask the following questions:

• Why? Why would we use this new metric?  What purpose does it serve?  What expectations do we have from the use of this metric?  Does it show us something different than our current metrics do?  Does it provide more or different information than we already have?

• What?  What is its definition?  What will this metric communicate? 

• Who?  Who will be involved in this metric?  And what are their roles?  Who will define it?  Who will create the actual measurement system?  Who will publish it?  Who will interpret it?  Who will use it?  Who will have access to it? With any metric, it is important to consider the intended audience.  It is also important to be aware of the unintended audience.  In other words, when creating a metric and considering its audience, you may want to try to ensure that people "can't hurt themselves" with it.

• Where?  Where will this metric be published?  Will it be an internal metric?  Or an external metric?  Is it company-wide?  Or is it only pertinent on a regional or divisional basis? Will it be published in paper reports or electronic reports?  Will it be available on a dashboard? 
  One key consideration might be security and portability.  Are you trying to keep this metric confidential and internal?  By publishing it in an email report, is it at risk for external exposure?  Would it be better off on a secure internal dashboard or intranet?

• When?  When is the metric published?  I think one of the key issues here is frequency.  These days, a lot of processes can be measured and reported on daily, hourly, or even real-time basis.  But, is it needed that frequently?  Can the information be processed and acted on that quickly?  If not, we may just be wasting resources.  A weekly reading may be sufficient and more appropriate.  In fact, more frequent reporting may inaccurately imply that the frequency of reaction or response is much higher than it realistically can be.

• How?  How will this metric be reported?  What format?  Will it be sent out as a table of numbers in a spreadsheet?  Will it be shown in a graph of a PowerPoint report?  Will it be reported dynamically in a dashboard, as a graph, or a dial?  Will it be reported as a standalone number/level?  Will it be an index or the percentage change from the last time it was reported?  Will it be compared to a benchmark?  If so, how is the benchmark defined?  Is it an external industry-specific benchmark?  Or an internal company-specific benchmark?  Will it be compared to a particular goal?

These days it is so easy to add more and more metrics to our daily existence.  Every time a new one crosses our desks, it is tempting to latch on to it, add it to a spreadsheet, and forward it on to someone else in our group (particularly if it makes us look good!).  But, at the rate of change and growth of these new technologies and new metrics, I think we need to be more discriminating about the metrics we utilize.  If we consider the questions above, before adopting new metrics, I believe that we will adopt fewer metrics, but concentrate on the most actionable and important ones.  As a result, we will be able to control the flow of information, so that we can learn from it, without getting overwhelmed by all of the data that is available. 

Posted by Trina Arnett at 12:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)