<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Matt Riskam</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mattriskam.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mattriskam.com</link>
	<description>Business, Design &#38; Philosophy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:40:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Right-Brain Marketing</title>
		<link>http://mattriskam.com/right-brain-marketing/</link>
		<comments>http://mattriskam.com/right-brain-marketing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 05:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mattriskam</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattriskam.com/?p=109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back when I was first learning Google AdWords and search engine marketing, I took a Google-sponsored seminar about the topic. An SEM expert gave a keynote presentation to about 30 of us. One by one, he showed us a few full page ads and almost immediately removed them from the projector. He asked us what we noticed in the ad from the few seconds it was shown. Surprisingly, the students had an amazing ability to describe what they liked or disliked about it. He went on to explain that after a search on Google, the average visitor spends just 6 seconds evaluating whether or not a particular website will deliver what they are looking for...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back when I was first learning Google AdWords and search engine marketing, I took a Google-sponsored seminar about the topic. An SEM expert gave a keynote presentation to about 30 of us. One by one, he showed us a few full page ads and almost immediately removed them from the projector. He asked us what we noticed in the ad from the few seconds it was shown. Surprisingly, the students had an amazing ability to describe what they liked or disliked about it. He went on to explain that after a search on Google, the average visitor spends just 6 seconds evaluating whether or not a particular website will deliver what they are looking for. <strong>Just 6 seconds.</strong> That&#8217;s it. Isn&#8217;t that incredible? The idea that human beings make up their minds so quickly and so intuitively through first impressions has stuck with me ever since.</p>
<p><strong>Great marketing is about emotion.</strong> It’s about making a connection. When people acquaint themselves with a company&#8217;s message through an ad, they quickly &#8211; almost immediately &#8211; know whether or not they want to buy. They may not know exactly why (this is an opportunity for the seller to articulate and support the rationale behind the purchase), but they instinctively sense whether or not the product is likely to be worthwhile.</p>
<p>Accepting this precept means understanding that consumer demand begins with a spark of interest the moment they experience a product &#8211; or the message behind it &#8211; for the first time. In just a few seconds, a very complex, and very right-brained phenomenon occurs. From the initial contact, this spark either ignites or subsides. If it ignites, it&#8217;s because a chord was struck &#8211; and that chord is always based on emotion. If it fades, the listener has lost interest, and either the product or the messaging needs rethinking.</p>
<p>After the initial reaction, secondary needs come into consciousness. This is where cost, convenience, discounts and competitor claims can come into play. But these things are left-brain concerns, and they happen to be so subordinate to the initial gut feeling that when a company chooses to sell on these terms with the customer, they are immediately on defense. They have to contend with budget-minded shoppers, cost-conscious hagglers and people that decide simply not to bother buying more stuff. We have all felt this way at one point or another. And when we feel this way, there isn&#8217;t anything a salesman can say or do that will sway us to hand over hard-earned cash. <strong>If you haven’t grabbed our attention within those 6 seconds, we’re walking away.</strong></p>
<p>Some companies are adept at focusing their marketing muscle on this initial spark of enthusiasm. More should learn. So who&#8217;s got their advertising aligned this way? Off the top of my head I can think of at least three: Apple, Virgin and Google. Take, for example, the following three commercials. Watch each and notice how the first few seconds draw you to watch more. If you can, pay attention to the right-brain response. What do you feel? I love these ads because they hit on the three most important sentiments, respectively: fun, cool &amp; cute.</p>
<p><strong>Apple &#8220;The Funnest iPod Ever&#8221;:</strong></p>
<p><div class="videoContainer"><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/m7DI884LGrg" frameborder="0" width="480" height="360"></iframe></div></p>
<p><strong>Virgin: &#8221;Your Airline&#8217;s Either Got It or It Hasn&#8217;t&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><div class="videoContainer"><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hbib-A6NpW8" frameborder="0" width="480" height="274"></iframe></div></p>
<p><strong>Google: &#8221;Dear Sophie&#8221;</strong></p>
<p><div class="videoContainer"><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/R4vkVHijdQk" frameborder="0" width="480" height="274"></iframe></div></p>
<p>Amazingly simple messaging. No tech spec comparisons, no competitor trash talk &#8211; just perfect connection with the viewer. The simplicity is legendary. In the Apple ad, there’s no need for voiceover. Virgin isn’t talking about fares or plane schedules. Google isn’t comparing themselves to Bing or Facebook. They’re all just focused on the message of “Try our product. You’ll love it.”</p>
<p>If you want your message to be memorable, always play to the right side of the brain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mattriskam.com/right-brain-marketing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>They Could Have Been the Next Apple</title>
		<link>http://mattriskam.com/they-could-have-been-the-next-apple/</link>
		<comments>http://mattriskam.com/they-could-have-been-the-next-apple/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 02:32:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mattriskam</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattriskam.com/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When HP purchased Palm for $1.2 billion, I had hope &#8211; as did many &#8211; that they would push the boundaries of webOS and grow it to scale. Of course, that didn&#8217;t happen. The decision to open source webOS is better than just killing it, I suppose. But it still doesn&#8217;t solve the two fundamental [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When HP purchased Palm for $1.2 billion, I had hope &#8211; as did many &#8211; that they would push the boundaries of webOS and grow it to scale. Of course, that didn&#8217;t happen.</p>
<p>The decision to open source webOS is better than just killing it, I suppose. But it still doesn&#8217;t solve the two fundamental problems that plagued webOS since its inception at Palm and prevented the fantastic operating system from achieving success. Those two problems are 1) poor &amp; uninspiring hardware, and 2) failure to nurture and grow a thriving app economy.</p>
<p>Of course, HP introduced a third problem shortly after the purchase. That problem was massive, productivity-sapping bureaucracy, and it ultimately proved more cancerous than the first two.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not the only one who had high hopes for the resurgence of Palm/HP. Many tech writers and enthusiasts wrote about the possibilities of this purchase. It&#8217;s always tough to see a bright future for a company while its team fails to execute. It&#8217;s even tougher to witness well-crafted work like webOS get mismanaged into obscurity.</p>
<p>For me, the catalyst for all this hope and potential was the idea of another vertically stacked company integrating a seamless marriage between hardware <em>and</em> software. Apple has proven that good software needs good hardware &#8211; and both need to be built by the same company in order to achieve prime simplicity for the user. HP knew this to be the right path. With this strategy, they could have presented a challenger to Apple. They could have been a worthy opponent to iPhone &amp; iPad dominance.</p>
<p>The idea is seductive. Yet like most &#8220;what if&#8217;s&#8221;, it was ultimately too good to be true. Perhaps if HP had kept Mark Hurd on as CEO they may have had a shot. He had problems, but it seemed like he saw the light in building out webOS to its fullest potential.</p>
<p>For Apple, they sit alone and unchallenged as the kings of perfect integration. For HP, they&#8217;ve lost their opportunity. Perhaps if things went differently &#8211; much differently &#8211; they could have been the next Apple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mattriskam.com/they-could-have-been-the-next-apple/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s Your Story?</title>
		<link>http://mattriskam.com/whats-your-story/</link>
		<comments>http://mattriskam.com/whats-your-story/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 06:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mattriskam</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Branding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEM]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mattriskam.com/?p=33</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For a company, the perception of its brand is everything. Companies spend billions each year on ensuring customers see their brands in a positive light. Countless dollars are spent on advertising. Companies adopt three screen initiatives that bombard and overload consumers with ads and flood them with information. Billions more dollars are pumped into consultants [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a company, the perception of its brand is everything. Companies spend billions each year on ensuring customers see their brands in a positive light. Countless dollars are spent on advertising. Companies adopt three screen initiatives that bombard and overload consumers with ads and flood them with information. Billions more dollars are pumped into consultants and efficiency groups to try to trim the message in a way that cuts through the noise of competition.</p>
<p>Now, I&#8217;m a marketer. It&#8217;s been my job to promote products and help them sell. I&#8217;m familiar with the techniques and tricks companies use to sway and compel people to buy. There are lots of tutorials and case studies on the efficacy of call to action, repetitive alliteration and key differentiators in ads. But here&#8217;s the thing that nobody seems to answer. In a hyper competitive landscape where everybody is pitching their product, how do you truly stand out?</p>
<p>Day in and day out, minute by minute, we are barraged with ads that tell us, command us &#8211; even plead with us &#8211; to buy their product. But fewer and fewer ads are succeeding in breaking through the noise. Don&#8217;t believe this is a problem for marketers? Next time, instead of fast forwarding through your DVR, spend one or two commercial breaks <em>listening</em> to the ads. Close your eyes and really listen. Count the number of times  you hear &#8220;call now!&#8221; or &#8220;try our offer!&#8221;. Nearly every final 10 seconds of a tv time slot is used this way. Start listening and paying attention to this and notice how all the ads start to congeal into one big, sloppy mess. Taken individually, the ads (mostly) aren&#8217;t all that bad. The problem is they&#8217;re not paying attention to how the other ads before and after their time slot dilute their messaging power. They&#8217;re not aware in the slightest bit how the consumer experiences a commercial break. And since most marketing departments are oriented and trained in the same manner, using the same techniques, the end result is a single, monotonous stream without variation.</p>
<p>Do calls to action work? Yes &#8211; they <em>can</em>. But they greatly lose their impact when everyone else is saying the same thing. Instead, try something different. Even if you don&#8217;t have an idea that is 100% unique, try bringing a new twist to your product or service that <em>is 100% unique to you</em>. This is not a gimmick. Be real and be honest about what you bring to the table. Primary differentiators are those that contribute to the creation story of the product or service. For example, what is the founder&#8217;s story? What were their struggles and successes? What special care is taken to make this product? How long was the recipe toiled over and tweaked until the finished product was worthy of selling? I love these stories, and other customers do, too. They form the cornerstone of brand loyalty. Stand outside a great bakery in the line that snakes all the way around the corner. Ask others why they stand in line there, as opposed to going across the street and buying. They&#8217;ll tell you things like &#8220;this is the only place that uses a real brick oven &#8211; and it makes a difference&#8221; or &#8220;their dough is always kneaded by hand. No machines.&#8221; Whatever the reason is, the story is memorable and unique &#8211; and can&#8217;t be attributed to competitors.</p>
<p>Ancillary differentiators are important, too. These can be outstanding customer service, or free shipping on all products, or a money back guarantee. Whatever it is, make sure you stand behind it completely. When you&#8217;ve got your differentiators down, write a single sentence that encapsulates what it is your company does and how it solves your customer&#8217;s problem using these distinguishing features. The sentence should be 10 words or less. Brownie points if it&#8217;s under 5. When you go to write your ad, make this sentence the focal point.</p>
<p>The key ingredient to this is that the answer <strong>must truly</strong> solve your customer&#8217;s problem. It must live up to your claims &#8211; not just in your marketing meeting, but in the customer&#8217;s real world. If you use this approach, you don&#8217;t really need a call to action at all. If you&#8217;re efficient at communicating your message, people will search you out on their own using Google, Bing, Facebook, et al. When they find you, if you stay consistent on your message, they&#8217;ll usually give you a try. If you deliver on your promise and meet their expectations, you will have just earned a repeat customer. Then they&#8217;ll tell other people about you, who will in turn seek you out. And before long, you&#8217;ll begin to hear your own customers retelling your unique story, as they stand outside your proverbial bakery, in the line that snakes around the corner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://mattriskam.com/whats-your-story/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

