We Bring Technology to Market.

Business building blocks

• Posted by Leo Valiquette
• January 29, 2009
• Leave a comment

By Leo Valiquette

It was business building 101 this morning at OCRI’s monthly Technology Executive Breakfast, with three executives representing different stages of a company’s growth offering pearls of wisdom and insights learned at the School of Hard Knocks.

Mark Edwards, president of Bent 360: MediaLab represented start-up companies; Rob Woodbridge, CEO of Rove, spoke for growing companies, while Jim Roche, founder and former CEO of Tundra Semiconductor and president and CEO of business and management consultancy Stratford Managers, represented established companies.

Here’s a rundown of the key points discussed by the panel:

1. Diversity among a group of partners or company founders is key to ensure one person’s weaknesses are offset by another’s strengths. Diverse backgrounds and skill sets are vital.

2. Focus. Focus. Focus. A company must have a clear understanding of its own identity. To whom is it selling? Why? What is its value proposition? As Jim commented, if an organization suffers from this lack of clarity, there will be confusion within the ranks, people will come to work at cross purposes and revenue growth will stagnate. Rob shared his experiences about the benefits of Rove’s decision to refocus around one single enterprise product rather than chasing multiple opportunities in both the enterprise and consumer markets with eight products.

3. There is no such thing as overnight success. Citing author Malcolm Gladwell and his book Outliers: The Story of Success, Jim talked about the 10,000-hour rule — the amount of hard work needed to truly master something and achieve success. He contended that behind every “overnight success story” there are, in fact, years of effort under the radar and behind the scenes.

4. Cold calling. Few people tackle this one with gusto, but as the panelists emphasized, if you start with people you know, your list of prospects will run out in short order. If you’re not making contact with clients or prospective clients on a regular basis, then you’re not in business. Mark himself aims to make five calls a day (not necessarily all cold). He emphasized the importance of using tools and databases such as LinkedIn, Dun & Bradstreet and Hoovers to develop contact lists. From there, the trick is to start calling and work through an organization until you have found the receptive individual who has buying authority, or can serve as your internal advocate with those that do. Just leaving a phone message breaks the ice and makes the follow-up call a warm one, he said.

5. When to shake up the management team or make a change was also discussed. Jim acknowledged that most organizations tend to be slow to identify and act on weaknesses that affect an organization. He emphasized the importance of executives acting on their gut instinct since they rarely have the luxury of making a decision with all the facts in hand. If you think there is a problem, there likely is. He considers it a sign of good leadership to be able to provide clear and consistent feedback on a subordinate’s performance with direct, and even brutal, honesty.

6. The value of mentoring was also discussed, not just in receiving it, but in giving it. According to Mark, the rewards flow both ways and he isn’t afraid to seek out as mentors people younger than himself if they have opinions he values and experiences that are relevant. Jim commented on more formalized mentorship in the form of advisory boards or boards of directors and spoke about the leads these people can provide into new customers or financing opportunities.

7. And then there was the cold hard truth that any company operating in the B2B space will have to look outside of its own backyard if it wants to growth. Jim said a Canadian B2B company should expect 70 to 80 per cent of its revenues to come from outside its home market. And though it is a challenge for an earlier-stage company to manage it, a presence on the ground in a foreign market, especially one as distant both geographically and culturally as China, is critical. The challenge is ensuring these staff remained linked into the organization and its culture through frequent contact with the home office, both by phone and in person.

8. And lastly, I can’t fail to mention Mark’s endorsement of engaging with a PR resource to help raise a company’s profile in its target markets.

Leo Valiquette

Posted in:

• Marketing strategy
• Social media
• Technology marketing

Reaping the rewards of a good reference

• Posted by Leo Valiquette
• January 27, 2009
• Leave a comment

By Leo Valiquette

If “location, location, location” is the axiom of real estate agents, then “reference customers, reference customers, reference customers” is the public relations equivalent.

Customers who have deployed a vendor’s product or service provide validation and demonstrate uptake in the market. They can speak in dollars and cents terms about why they adopted a particular product and the benefits and return on investment they have derived from it. This, more often than not, will make an editor sit up and take notice.

I’ve seen promising editorial opportunities with big name media outlets drift away for the simple reason that a client could not provide a happy customer willing to stand up and provide that third-party endorsement.

But is having the platinum, diamond-encrusted reference customer eager to shout your praises from the rooftops the ticket to piles of positive media coverage?

It certainly helps. However, that customer story must still be developed and presented in a manner that fits the current editorial needs of the media being targeted.

One of our clients, for example, has an enthusiastic reference customer on board who can articulate the pain points that were addressed by our client’s product and how it contributed to the overall growth and success of the customer’s business during a dramatic market boom.

However, the industry in which both client and customer operate is, like so many others right now, experiencing a downturn. Several of the media that I contacted no longer have the appetite for the growth and success story that was the obvious angle to pursue during the market upswing. That’s yesterday’s news. The angle that is timely and relevant now is how the customer is going to weather the downturn and how our client’s product will provide the operational efficiencies and cost savings that will improve margins and boost the bottom line.

As one editor put it, “It’s easy to succeed during a boom. The real test of a company’s viability is how it survives a downturn.” For many media outlets, that’s the story that is relevant now. Can we deliver that angle? Yes. But only by directly contacting the media most important to our client with a solid story angle and having an informal chat with each editor were we able to determine what elements of the reference customer’s story are the most important to garner the ink we want for our client.

Leo Valiquette

Posted in:

• Public and media relations

The value of shooting the breeze

• Posted by Danny Sullivan
• January 23, 2009
• Leave a comment

By Danny Sullivan

At inmedia, we frequently position ourselves against those whose perspective is that PR is “all about relationships.” And, while I wholeheartedly stand by our mantra that it is the ability to convey a story and not the relationship that dictates PR success, it cannot be denied that relationships are still important. They are even more relevant from the perspective of a PR firm’s clients than for the PR firm itself. PR firms come and go but, assuming a company sticks around, its relationship with its target media will last forever.

This week, one of my clients traveled to New York to meet face to face with a group of editors from a key trade publication that covers his company’s market. Was this meeting at the request of the editors? No, we brokered it from our end. Was it for an article they were working on? No. So why was this meeting happening? Simple. It was for the relationship.

While our client had some exposure to the publication, the relationship was very much the domain of inmedia, the PR firm. This is, of course, perfectly understandable – the very reason you have a PR firm is to maintain your relationship with the media, and this remains a core part of our business – but huge value can be gained on all sides from extending the media relationship to include the client at a deeper level.

So what happened in this meeting in New York? Well, they shot the breeze. Discussed the state of the industry, talked a bit about the company and what was going on with it, but no hard pitches for stories, no Q&A, no pressure to come up with the goods.

So where was the value in this meeting, you might ask. Why not ask my client, who left the meeting full of enthusiasm for the people he had just met, and excited about the future prospects for working with them. Or why not ask the editors, who expressed delight at the meeting and a desire to do so again at some point in the near future. Value was seen on all sides from a meeting that accomplished little in hard results.

Sure, inmedia could have handled this meeting ourselves, but our preoccupation with achieving results for clients would no doubt have created a different atmosphere. Sometimes stepping back from the day-to-day hard selling of stories and constant attempts to generate coverage can result in a far more rewarding result – a blooming relationship.

Danny Sullivan

Posted in:

• Public and media relations

The double-edged Web

• Posted by Leo Valiquette
• January 20, 2009
• Leave a comment

By Leo Valiquette

Despite all the hype, hoopla and debate around social media as a marketing and public relations tool, there is one even more fundamental aspect of the Web that is far more pervasive: the search.

It seems weird to say “the search” without putting “Google” in there, but there are other services available to dig up information, Wikipedia being the most obvious. It used to be that information was power, now it’s an avalanche that overwhelms us. Intelligence is what’s important: the ability to filter through the overload to determine what is useful and chart trends or patterns that have meaning and relevance.

When all that information is so readily available and convenient, it’s easy to take it at face value without looking deeper and doing some good old-fashioned digging to verify facts and the credibility of the source. For a journalist on deadline eager to wrap up a story, it can be a trap. Take the example cited by Drew Benvie at Drew B’s take on tech PR, in which a fictional athlete was presented in an article as an actual person, thanks to a bogus profile on Wikipedia.

That’s not to suggest that Wikipedia is not a valid research tool, but it is vulnerable to abuse and demonstrates the importance of verifying facts and cross-referencing any online source of information.

For organizations sensitive to how their brand or image is being presented to the world, it is definitely important to keep an eye on such online information portals to ensure the accuracy of whatever information is being presented about them.

And while there are valid questions about the veracity of online information, what about the value of obtaining media coverage online instead of in print?

As a newspaper editor with only so many inches of space in the print product but much more on the website, I would often hear the complaint that running a story only online was somehow inferior to running it in print.

Sure, there is tactile satisfaction to be had in handling ink-stained paper, but it should be amply evident by now that content online lives far longer and reaches a far larger audience than the processed corpses of trees. In the newspaper business, I would get feedback on stories from readers on other continents after the content appeared online. The print product, on the other hand, was distributed in only one city. You do the math.

Kevin Dugan at the Bad Pitch Blog shares my sentiment and offers a video clip to help make the point.

Leo Valiquette

Posted in:

• Public and media relations
• Random thoughts
• Social media

Why is a startup like murder?

• Posted by Francis Moran
• January 16, 2009
• Leave a comment

By Francis Moran

Why is a startup like murder? Well, according to two-time start-up veteran Shawn Griffin, it’s not because the long hours and uncertain outcome will kill you. Rather, as he told an assembly of alumni of OCRI‘s popular Entrepreneur’s Edge educational program last night, both murder and startups require the same three elements.

“Motive, opportunity and ability are essential for murder and also for a startup,” said Griffin, who delivered a two-fold return to investors when he sold his first company a mere five months after launching it but saw his second venture go down “in a very painful manner.”

The motive to start a new technology company must come from passion, he said, while the opportunity lies in identifying a real pain in the marketplace that the new company is going to solve.

As for ability, it “boils down to two things, people and money. The good news about today is that there’s a dearth of money but a wealth of good people.”

Griffin was speaking at the first-ever reunion for alumni of Entrepreneur’s Edge, a popular educational program that brings seasoned entrepreneurs and subject-matter experts in to deliver course material to participants. The next session of the program, now in its fourth year, runs from February 9 to 13.

Francis Moran

Posted in:

• Startups