As part of what I do, I get alerts from Google on mentions of particular items/phrases. One of the phrases I watch out for is, of course, “personal reputation management”. Over the last couple of months I have been alerted to various items and research statistics including the following:

♦  33% of people routinely search someone’s name (their name, not the name of their firm) before contacting them in a business context.

♦  Up to 77% of potential clients, partners or prospects use Google, at some point, to research the background of an individual working for a potential supplier or business contact.

♦  87% of us believe that the CEO’s reputation is an important part of a company’s reputation

♦  78% of executive recruiters routinely use search engines to learn more about candidates

♦  35% have eliminated candidates based upon information found

I can’t actually vouch for the accuracy of the research but, based upon my own experience, together with the anecdotal experience of colleagues, contacts and acquaintances, I don’t think that they are far off.

So in summary, lots of us are routinely conducting name searches on individuals that we are thinking of contacting in a business context and, up to 77% have used this method at some point. The vast majority of us also believe that the personal reputation of the boss of a firm is very important to their company.

In the jobs market, executive recruiters use name search as a “standard” tool and our online reputations are a potentially a very important part of the decision making process.

What happens if someone searches your name on Google? Are the results helping, hindering or non-existent? Give me a call (0845 2994229) if you need some help or advice.

What do people think of me when I speak the truth? I must consider these words from Philippians 2:5-9:

⁵ Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, ⁶ who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, ⁷ but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. ⁸ And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. ⁹ Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, ¹⁰ that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, ¹¹ and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Your reputation and the reputation of people you partner with and represent is increasingly important.

In the online world our activities and comments are a Search away and we can be judged by the company we keep in a matter of minutes.

Social and professional networks and other online media allows you to very easily put up information about your interests and much more. It’s very easy to connect with people with similar interests and share your thoughts and feelings.

Education about creating and managing a professional relationship is only just emerging and evolving. Make sure the reputation that precedes you is one that you are in control of.

Click here to develop your network and keep the company of other entrepreneurs, millionaires and high achievers to enhance your reputation.

During the last year, I´ve been quite emotional. It´s hard to get trough the daily life. Sometimes you aim for certain things and you reach your goal, but then, you realize that that goal is reachable for a short instance, later goes further and further away from you.

Now I feel weird. I love what I´m doing, it´s not that. I just have so many feelings I don´t know what to do with them. They´re all bugging me at the same time.

It seems like everything is non-reachable right now. I know I´m doing parts of my dreams, yet, they´re so far away. The University is good for me, my program is excellent, it´s one of the best, but the uni itself has a very poor reputation. Something we tried to research before deciding to get here. This university doesn´t participate in yearly rankings. At first I thought it was good, because they don´t want to get involved in stuff, I thought, but now I know that´s it´s the opposite.

It´s getting harder and harder. Again, I love the career I chose and the education is very good, our teachers are teaches at Drama Schools. Everything with the homework, essay, assessments etc, is filling my time up.

Recently, I tried out to be in a 3rd year production and I got it. Since it got delayed, all my things got kind of on top of each other and I can´t put on more responsibility than the ones I already have. Today, I had to write to the director and tell her that I can´t be in her scene. It sucks, because I wanted it, but right now, I´m not strong enough to put on too many things upon what I already have. I need to get into my life and start it over, since I really haven´t done that yet with all the shifting´s in my life – changing countries, schools, chasing dreams etc.

Anyways, I know I´ll work it out. I have to build up a strength for next semester so I can deal with all these thing in a better way. What gives me strength now is that I´m going home to mami for Christmas, I really need her to hug me, give me a kiss and tuck me into bed. Miss you so mamita.

xoxo

The current issue of Wired (not available on-line as of this posting) has a must-read article cover story: Gone.  The premise was to determine how easily someone could disappear and adopt a new identity in the digital age.  While people can easily adopt a new life on-line, it would appear exceedingly difficult to avoid detection in an age when all of our personal information and, to some extent, our every move is captured and accessible electronically.

To test this idea, Wired asked writer Evan Ratliff to disappear for one month.  He could tell no one of his plans (not even his family or girlfriend).  They announced the contest online on August 14th, set a bounty for his discovery ($5,000–$3,000 of which was Ratliff’s own money), and invited the general public to find Ratliff through whatever means they liked (preferably, legal).  The contest would be over when someone came face to face with Ratliff, snapped a picture of him, and said the word “fluke”.  All told, it took 17 days to catch Ratliff.  The article is a must read, providing the fascinating details of Ratliff’s moves as well as those of his pursuers.

What occurred to me when reading the article was that, without saying so, Wired essentially crowdsourced the manhunt for Ratliff.  Rather than hire a single investigator or firm to find him, Wired outsourced the task to a large, undefined, diverse group of people (basically, Jeff Howe’s definition of crowdsourcing).  For crowdsourcing to work (or for crowds to be “wise”) the crowd generally has to have three attributes, all of which the hunter group seemed to possess:

• Diversity: The more diverse a crowd is, the more likely it is to be intelligent. Why? Because a diverse crowd will bring many different views to bear on a problem, thereby increasing the likelihood that a solution will be found. From what I can tell, the crowd chasing Ratliff was quite diverse and included people of all ages, professions, and skill sets. And it was an interesting mix of people who eventually nabbed him.
• Independence: The crowd must also be relatively independent, meaning individuals are not reliant on the same source of information. This is important for two reasons. First, when information is independent it’s more likely the ‘errors’ of each individual will cancel each other out. Second, independent individuals are more likely to bring unique information to the table. The article provides evidence for the independence of individuals and clusters of individuals working on the search. While many people were sampling the same information via the Twitter #vanish hashtag, there were tons of individuals bringing their own information to the party.
• Decentralization: The more decentralized, or localized, members of a crowd the smarter it will be, the idea being that the more localized and spread out a crowd is the greater the sources of information that the crowd can pull from. The hunters in this case were highly decentralized, located all over the country and providing local intelligence that the group as a whole could benefit from.

It also occurred to me that the story reveals and illustrates a few other important aspects of crowdsourcing:

• Rewards: Motivating a crowd is a key component when implementing a crowdsourcing strategy to problem solving. If the crowd isn’t properly motivated they are unlikely to put the time and effort into the task at hand. Wired did provide a monetary incentive (the $5K), the crowd seemed just as motivated (if not more so) by the reputational incentive of being known across the Wired-world as the one who found Ratliff. And not to ruin the ending of the article, but readers will see that on balance the reputational motivation won the day in this case. The lesson is that you should take into account multiple types of incentives, not just monetary, when trying to motivate a crowd.
• Self-organization & Collaboration: Even though there are individual incentives to solve the problem, it did not deter hunters from pooling their knowledge and working together in teams. The story mentions that almost immediately folks shared their information and thoughts via the hashtag #vanish, formed groups on Facebook, and even relocated to secure chat rooms to prevent moles from providing Ratliff with counterintelligence. Most of these people had never met each other. Almost instantly hunters self-organized, without the benefit of hierarchical direction. And much like the recent Netflix contest, individual hunters banded together in ad hoc and informal teams to work collaboratively towards finding Ratliff faster than if they simply worked alone.

Be sure to check it out.

Everyone’s talking about it, the rivers are running ruby red with Guinness, and no, it’s not March 17th. If you don’t know what I’m blogging about, then you’re more underground than a badger! On Wednesday night Thierry Henry was immortalised in football history, joining such greats as Maradonna, Fashanu and Pires, to name but a few.

In the moments before William Gallas slotted in his point blank header to give France the lead over the Republic of Ireland in the extra time World Cup Qualifying face off, Henry faced a choice echoing a scene out of Hamlet: to cheat or not to cheat? Fortunately for Mr Henry he hasn’t gone mad and met his untimely death….that is, unless the Irish get their own way!

But the questions being asked by the media are all about whether his reputation – before Wednesday one which was legendary for football artistry, fair play and being a perceived all-round good guy – can recover from this unseemly incident and whether ‘Terry ‘Enry’ will be forever remembered for his dazzling silky skills that set the Premiership alight, or whether it will be for that moment of calculated madness.

Terry 'Enry gives the ball a helping hand into the net on Wednesday night

Needless to say, the tabloids have opted for the latter and, ever the populists, are baying for some French blood. The witch hunt reminds me of the way they went after a young lad called David Beckham after his acrimonious World Cup exit 11 years ago. I’ll come back to that.

The broadsheets are, as ever, taking a more rational view of the situation. No, a replay is not the logical course of action. Maradonna is still remembered for being arguably the greatest player that ever lived, despite the handling, snorting and ranting antics that punctuated his career. Yes, Henry intentionally handled it, but, to quote Roy Keane, get a grip and move on. Dodgy decisions decide games all the time. Ireland aren’t the first and they definitely won’t be the last to suffer as a result of one.

I agree with them, for the most part. Just one thing, though: I remember Maradonna for being a fat, cheating drug addict.

What about Beckham, though? He’s successfully reversed the ire of the tabloids, the general public and some particularly self-righteous West Ham fans to become the nation’s sweetheart, Captain Fantastic and the guy every guy wants to be, every girl wants to be with.

So which kind will we find Henry to be, in years to come, when we reminisce about his glittering career, which has seen him lift Europe and the World’s most sought after trophies? Time will tell, but I’d bet on the second one.

In November of 2009, the major news outlets carried the story of a pending food shortage in the US.  The story also spread across Facebook and Twitter. The product shortage would last until the summer of 2010.  The food in short supply, Kellogg frozen waffles—Eggos.  Not a major crisis for consumers but it is a problem for Kellogg.  Shortage means less sale of the product.  Moreover, the shortage is a result of business discontinuity.  Kellogg manufactures Eggos in four locations in the US.  The largest bakery was offline while major equipment changes were in being made.  That was a planned stoppage.  The cause of the shortage was the unexpected shutdown of the bakery in Atlanta, GA.  When heavy rains flooded Atlanta, the Kellogg facility was a flood casualty.  Flood waters are not clean so the facility needed to be thoroughly scrubbed before it could reopen.  Here is how Kellogg explained the situation on their web site:

“Question:

I have not been able to find Eggo® waffles in the store. When will they be available again?

Answer:

Kellogg Company recently experienced supply constraints caused by flood damage at our bakery in Atlanta.  In addition, we’ve been making significant equipment enhancements and repairs in our largest waffle bakery.  Unfortunately, this is taking longer than anticipated. 

The Eggo™ team is working around the clock to bring everyone’s favorite waffles back to store shelves as quickly as possible.  We hope to regain full distribution of Eggo products by the middle of 2010. This is a top priority for Kellogg Company.
 

Click here to receive periodic updates from the Eggo® brand about your favorite products, including news about when they will be back on shelf, or for more information, call 866-971-3320.  Thank you for your patience during this time, and we apologize for any inconvenience.”

http://www2.kelloggs.com/general.aspx?id=3006&terms=eggo

Most of the news reports repeated Kellogg’s story.  Flood coupled with an equipment change created the shortage.  For a sample story see http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2009-11-18-eggo-shortage_N.htm?csp=34

But there was more to the Atlanta facility closure and business interruption than the flood story revealed.  The Atlanta facility has been closed prior to flood for extensive cleaning.  According to the Georgia Department of Agriculture (GDA), the facility was closed due to Listeria monocytogenes being found in some samples of Eggos.  Listeria is a rather harmless bacteria but can be dangerous for people with weak immune systems, newborns, and pregnant women.  It is estimated that 4,500 cases of Eggos were recalled in early September.  The facility was then closed for cleaning and was about to restart when the floods hit.  The news stories and Kellogg information did not address the Listeria shutdown, all the blame rested on the flood.  http://www.wsbtv.com/news/21661515/detail.html

The Listeria recall was not a secret.  The recall was voluntary and reported in September.  It was an FDA Class II recall meaning the probably of serious illness was remote.  There were no illnesses reported from the tainted Eggos either.  The GDA oversaw the cleaning process.  The exact products recalled were:

Kellogg’s Eggo Cinnamon Toast waffles, 10-count package, UPC code 3800040440 with “Best If Used Before” dates beginning with: NOV22 10 EA, NOV23 10 EA and NOV24 10 EA.

Kellogg’s Eggo Toaster Swirlz Cinnamon Roll Minis eight-count package, UPC code 3800023370 with a “Best If Used Before” date beginning with NOV15 10 EA. http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/food-poisoning/news/20090902/eggo-recall

Questions to Consider

1.  Was it ethical for Kellogg to avoid the discussion of Listeria when explaining the Eggo shortage?
2. Why would Kellogg want to avoid mentioning the Listeria in the shortage coverage?
3. What is the advantage to Kellogg discussing the Listeria issue given that a few media outlets and online commentators made the connection?
4. What does this case illustrate about the power of the Internet and the news media to reveal information companies wish to avoid—why it is hard to “hide” information these days?
5. How could Kellogg use the shortage to benefit the Eggo brand, especially its online presence?
6. How would you rate Kellogg’s handling of the initial Listeria problem and what justifies your rating?
7. How is this case related to risk communication?

Events can develop at a frightening pace. Directors need to ensure they and their companies can monitor and react effectively to rapidly changing circumstances. Apparently healthy situations can quickly crumble. Hence directors need to think through the implications of their actions. Corporate reputations can also erode rapidly. Directors must ensure that people throughout the organization act and behave to protect and build internal and external expectations and perceptions.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir - Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, and my Lectures.

Weder von dir. Noch von anderen.

Das ganze Social Web basiert im Grunde darauf, das Bild von sich, anderen zu vermitteln und in den anderen nur die Bilder zu sehen, die von ihnen vermittelt werden. “Wer bist du?”, ist die erste Standardfrage im Neuen Web. Die Frage nach der Identität. Leg ein Profil an und mach es allen anderen sichtbar. Verbinde dich mit ihnen und zeige das Netzwerk deiner Kontakte. Steigere dadurch deine Reputation und zeige allen, wie wichtig du bist. Lass sie dann darüber reden und berichten. Lass sie deine Worte verbreiten und dich zitieren. Jedes Zitat von dir, jeder Verweis auf dich ist bedeutend. Buchhalter im Web zählen und berechnen deine Reputation. Hitlisten der Ego-Shooter. Selbsternannte Berater helfen dir dabei.

Dein Stellenwert wird öffentlich bilanziert. Dein Kurs an der Börse der Eitelkeiten und am Olymp der Götter. An den fiebrigen Kurven kann jeder erkennen, wie deine Gunst steigt oder fällt. Langsam fängst du an, selber diesen Barometern und an die Bilder zu glauben, die du von dir gemacht hast. Ein fataler Mechanismus.

Das Social Web ist die Sandkiste und Spielwiese der Narzisten.

Es ist kein Zufall, dass sich in den sozialen Medien weit überdurchschnittlich PR- und Marketing-Leute tummeln. Selbstvermarktung und alles andere im Social Web basieren auf diesem Verhalten. Das war zwar früher auch schon so. Nur, jetzt ist daraus eine Riesenmaschinerie geworden. Es ist vollautomatisiert wie die Programme der Investmentbroker, die ihre Papiere ohne menschliches Zutun bei voreingestellten Schwellenwerten kaufen und abstossen.

Ich meine nicht die Sockenpuppenspieler, anonymen Heckenschützen und Trolle. Ich meine die Ich-Marken im Web. Uns alle.

Was ist eine Identität im Web wert? Was hat diese Identität mit der Realität im wirklichen Leben zu tun? In welcher Wechselwirkung stehen die virtuellen Identitäten mit den realen? Wie beinflussen sie sich gegenseitig? Was sind die Chancen und Risiken dabei? Was ist mit denen, die ihre Identität nicht preisgeben? Die vielleicht nur beobachten und zuhören? Existieren sie nicht in der schönen neuen Welt? Jeder kennt die Situationen, wenn wir virtuellen Identitäten im realen Leben begegnen. Selten stimmen sie überein.

Das Leben ist nicht digital. Das Leben ist ein brennender Dornbusch.

Bild: Caravaggios „Narziss“ aus Wikipedia.

For the past two weeks I haven’t been standing up for the pledge of allegiance every morning. I made the decision for several reasons:

1. There is certainly not ‘liberty and justice for all’ in this country. Just look at gay rights. I can’t believe we even still have to protest equal rights in the 21st century. It’s absolutely beyond me.

2. The whole ‘Under God’ thing…I don’t like them forcing that on me at all. That sort of stuff shouldn’t be in the classroom of a public school. It’s on the edge of prayer.

3. Kids don’t actually stand for the pledge because they believe in it. They do it because it’s what they’ve been told to do since age 5. It reminds me of Nazi Germany, the way children had to pledge to Hitler every morning. Everyone’s just robots…and I do not want to be a robot to America, to any country, or to anything, for that matter.

Of course, people take unkindly to what they see as unpatriotic, especially when it’s a kid whose supposedly breaking the rules. I’m sure there’s several adults who look at me and think I’m just some stupid kid trying to get attention by acting out…but it’s so far from the truth. The truth is I have strong beliefs and I want to do what I feel is right, whether it is accepted by society or not. Just because everyone does something doesn’t make it right, and vice versa.

My teacher didn’t even notice for three days. On the third day he came up to me and asked “What was that…A protest against America?” and I said yes. He was a bit shocked and taken aback and said “Oh..tell me more later.” This morning before class ended he came up to me again and asked me why I’m not standing. I gave my reasons and he agreed with me on them and told me it’s the “boldest act of defiance” he’s ever seen.

But then he went on to ask “Is this legal?” and proceeded to tell me he’s worried about what’s going to happen to HIM if he doesn’t order me to stand. He doesn’t want to make me do anything, but he also wants to save his ass and not get in trouble by higher authority if another teacher happens to see what’s going on. This angered me that he’s so scared. I lost a lot of respect for him after he said that. And no, I won’t stand up to save him from getting in trouble. I’m not going to compromise my beliefs for anyone, even if he is my favorite teacher.

Most of the people in my class don’t even notice that I don’t stand…shows you just how robotic they really are. It really upsets me. I want to just yell at them all to WAKE UP and start thinking for yourselves for once!

It gets me really upset knowing how scared people are of their reputations, and how quick they are to submit to the ‘norm’, regardless if they even agree with it or not. People are so willing to just keep their heads down and keep quiet about everything…and this is why nothing ever changes.

If people demanded peace instead of another television set, then there’d be peace.

A friend of mine was eager to share her recent experience at a local nail salon. Not because it was a great experience. To the contrary, actually.

Seizing an opportunity to escape from the day to day routine of being a mother to two-year old twins, a wife and full time financial advisor, she slipped into a salon for a brief moment of pampering. This wasn’t a spectacular spa retreat, just a strip mall nail salon. There was nothing special or memorable about the experience. No fluffy white robe, glass of Chardonnay, candles or rose petals. Just a simple pedicure and manicure in a room full of tables and chairs. Then, something extraordinary happened. She got the bill.  SIXTY DOLLARS!!???

After recovering from the immediate shock, she confronted the owner. ‘I was expecting $30, not $60. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how you can build your clientele with these kinds of prices?  Nobody is going to pay that more than once, if they don’t have to.’ The owner proceeded to explain how she had to raise her prices because the landlord raised her rent.  My friend was appalled.   She immediately identified several ways the owner could enhance the experience by creating a “resort” feel that would make the price worth paying.  She would gladly pay more if she got more, but as it stands, she’ll never go back.

Customer stories like this won’t pay your rent.  Do you know what your customers are saying about you?  What are you doing to influence them to tell the story you want them to tell?  Isn’t your reputation worth doing something?

Ray Donovan was the Secretary of Labor under President Reagan. His time in office was marked by a highly publicized case in which Donovan and six others were tried in New York on charges of larceny and fraud. Donovan and the six other defendants were acquitted. However, at the conclusion of the trial, Donovan pointed out a lingering problem when he famously asked, “Which office do I go to get my reputation back?”

Proverbs 22:1 says: “A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches.” That being the case, let’s all guard ourselves against the sin of slander. Some of the Bible’s great characters were slanderously accused: Joseph (Genesis 39:7-20); David (2 Samuel 10:1-3); Stephen (Acts 6:8-14); Paul (Acts 24:5-6); and, of course, Jesus (Matthew 11:19, Matthew 26:59-68). Even though these men were all innocent of the accusations leveled against them, much damage was done to their reputations.

God’s word certainly allows for the proper prosecution of criminals. It also allows for legitimate criticism. What I’m saying is that we must be careful when we enter into this mine-field. Once a person’s reputation is destroyed, there is no office where the person can reclaim it. Proverbs 11:9 says: “The hypocrite with his mouth destroys his neighbor.” You see, there is incredible power in the tongue (Proverbs 18:21; James 3:1-12). So make sure that you use yours discreetly and truthfully.

To recent and soon-to-be graduates (and job seekers alike):

PLEASE DO NOT hide from the opportunity employers present by wanting to search for your online presence!

How hard have you worked to earn the right to graduate? How lucky are you that the Internet is the greatest promotional tool in history and our generation made it that way? Take advantage of the opportunity awaiting you: nosey employers digging for dirt.

About half a year stands between me and graduation, and I’m starting to get worried about the hype of a tough job market and having personal information available online. What worries me most is the negativity I am hearing surrounding both of those topics. Complaints such as:

“We’re graduating at the worst time ever. Applicants are more competitive and overqualified than ever and there are even fewer positions than applicants available!” Or even better:

“Do I have to take down pictures of me drinking? They do realize I’m legal, right? I’m just going to set my privacy settings way up or maybe even delete my account. You can never be too safe when it comes to your career!”

Yes, we are graduating during a recession. Yes, we understand the legal age of consumption. And yes, you can be too safe when trying to protect your career (particularly before it has even begun)! Sure, no one wants to see naked photos, puking or documentation of illegal activities, but if that’s what you’re promoting online then maybe you ought to reconsider this graduation gig altogether…

EVERY online profile is an expression of yourself (if it’s not, it should be) and should be utilized as a digital resume, or personal statement! Facebook, Twitter and even MySpace should be thought of as an opportunity to interview 24/7. The best part is you don’t even have to ask employers to look for you online – they’re going to do it anyway! How lucky are we?

A great friend once told me “Luck is when hard work meets opportunity.” Don’t miss the opportunity to exploit the greatest resource in history by showing potential employers that you’re ready for them, and maybe even a step ahead.

Here are three quick tips to promoting yourself via the Internet, especially social media (but please don’t stop here):

1. Run a Google search of your name, in all of its variations, and decide what content to keep or remove online (and go further than the first few pages of search results).
2. Ask someone who IS NOT your friend online to search for you on all SM sites to see how accessible your profiles are and what content you may like to change (act like you’re meeting the gf/bf’s parents for the first time and they’re being introduced to your profile, not you).
3. Create the online presence that you are proud of and won’t hide from, and begin engaging in professional conversations and activities (think of this as a fresh start by digitally introducing yourself to your next network of friends: coworkers & bosses).

Two of the world’s most expensive luxuries are found in dirt: gold and diamonds (dirt, rocks – same thing). Let your future employer find that third valuable resource the next time they go digging: shiny, attractive you.

I’ve been following Don Dodge on his blog for almost a year now. Smart, incisive and one of the most vocal cheerleaders of Microsoft and its products when he was there. Recently, shockwaves hit Don Dodge’s fans when he was laid off from the software behemoth along with another 5000 people. Well, that was sad and TechCrunch gave him a send-off that he so deserved. Within an hour and a half after that exit interview, Don was offered a position  in Google. Obviously, everyone’s happy about that now. But. And this is a big BUT. Don’s last blog post on Microsoft has ruffled more than a few feathers. For example:

Thanks Microsoft Outlook, but I’m going to Gmail. I made the switch to Gmail last week and it has been awesome! Outlook has been an old familiar friend for years, but it was getting kind of tired. Gmail is new, fast, web based, and has all the features I need. I especially like the way it threads conversations making it easy to keep everything in context. And of course the search capabilities are world class. One other subtle thing…no spam. I never realized how much corporate spam invaded my Microsoft inbox. Endless emails about corporate meetings, events, promotions, and CC’s on email threads I don’t care about. Gmail has been liberating.

as against this post on Windows Live Hotmail:

The new spell checker is very good, automatically checking before sending the message. It underlines incorrect spellings and links to an online dictionary for help. Last time I checked Gmail didn’t have a spell checker.

It does obviously make sense to praise your company’s products and evangelize them. That’s what they pay you for. But we also learn not to put down your competitor’s products. And it’s even worse when they are your past employers and have recently laid you off. It damages your credibility as the comments on his blog post reflects. Don has a lost a significant amount of personal credibility. And this WILL affect his ability to evangelize Google as his readers (me included) would not know whether he truly was passionate about the products or the pay.

Leave it to Fake Steve to complete the hatchet job.

It is November so it is time for US conservative groups and pundits to bring up the “War on Christmas.”  Companies that have employees greet customers with “happy holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas” and/or use the term “holidays” in advertising rather than “Christmas” are put on the naughty list.  Yes, the American Family Association (AFA) calls it the “Naughty or Nice List” as it rates retailers on their use of Christmas.  Here is a description of the list:

“Criteria – AFA reviewed up to four areas to determine if a company was ‘Christmas-friendly’ in their advertising: print media (newspaper inserts), broadcast media (radio/television), website and/or personal visits to the store. If a company’s ad has references to items associated with Christmas (trees, wreaths, lights, etc.), it was considered as an attempt to reach “Christmas” shoppers.

If a company has items associated with Christmas, but did not use the word ‘Christmas,’ then the company is considered as censoring “Christmas.”

Color Code:

Company uses the term “Christmas” on a regular basis, we consider that company Christmas-friendly.

Company refers to Christmas infrequently, or in a single advertising medium, but not in others.

Company may use ‘Christmas’ sparingly in a single or unique product description, but as a company, does not recognize it.” http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147486887

The conclusion is that if retailers do not use the word Christmas they are anti-Christmas and, therefore, anti-Christian.  AFA has every right to create their list and use public relations to share it with their members and supporters.  Retailers counter that the US market is diverse and “happy holidays” is more inclusive of a phrase.  So the choice is about inclusion and sensitivity to others for retailers rather than exclusion.  It seems odd that the old concern over exploiting Christmas for commercial gain has lost its appeal.  Retailers are now criticized for not exploiting Christmas.  It can get confusing.

In 2009, Gap became the initial target for the AFA.  They had an announcement about the Gap boycott on the web site and had their interactive site ready.  Go to http://action.afa.net/takeaction/gap/ and there is form to help spread the word about the boycott and a place to sign a boycott pledge.  There is also an explanation of the boycott at the site posted Nov. 11:

“AFA is calling for a limited two-month boycott of Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic, the three stores owned by San Francisco-based Gap Inc., over the company’s censorship of the word ‘Christmas.’

The boycott is part of our ongoing campaign to encourage businesses, communities and individuals to put Christ back in Christmas. The boycott runs from November 1 through Christmas Day.

For years, Gap has refused to use the word Christmas in its television commercials, newspaper ads and in-store promotions, despite tens of thousands of consumer requests to recognize Christmas and in spite of repeated requests from AFA to do the same.

Last year, Gap issued this politically-correct statement to Christmas shoppers: ‘Gap recognizes that many traditions are celebrated throughout this season and we feel it is important to display holiday signage that is inclusive to everyone.’” http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147489466

People visiting the site had mixed reactions to the boycott.  Here is a sample of the responses left on the page:

11/13/2009 7:43:29 PM
I also support the boycott.” http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147489466

But a funny thing happened along the way, Gap advertising did include Christmas along with a number of other holidays.  The television ad is complemented by a web site, www.cheerfactory.com, where people can send customized video singing greeting that includes one with Christmas (and the other holidays) in the message.  http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-neil17-2009nov17,0,2040716.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fbusiness+%28L.A.+Times+-+Business%29

The AFA used this opportunity to declare victory over the Gap and express continued distaste with the Gap:

As a result of your actions, Gap has produced a television commercial that uses the word “Christmas.” Here are the words to the commercial:

“Two, Four, Six, Eight, now’s the time to liberate
Go Christmas, Go Hanukkah, Go Kwanza, Go Solstice.
Go classic tree, go plastic tree, go plant a tree, go add a tree,
You 86 the rules, you do what feels just right.
Happy do whatever you wanukkah, and to all a cheery night.

Go Christmas, Go Hanukkah, go whatever holiday you wanukkah.

AFA believes this ad to be completely dismissive and disrespectful to those who celebrate the meaning and spirit of Christmas. AFA asked Gap for a meeting to discuss the ad, but Gap has not responded.

If this is Gap’s answer to recognizing Christmas, we are deeply disappointed.” http://action.afa.net/takeaction/gap/  

Questions to Consider

1.  Is it ethical for AFA to claim their actions changed Gap advertising when then ads would have been created long before the boycott started on November 11?
2. What advice would you provide Gap management about responding to the AFA boycott and what is the reasoning behind that advice?
3. How would you evaluate the reputational threat posed by the AFA boycott?
4. How could issues management have helped the Gap anticipate and to prepare for 2009 AFA boycott?
5. The Los Angeles Times article linked in the entry notes that the AFA boycotts have no financial effect.  What other effects are possible with a boycott?
6. How does this US-based case reflect concerns associated with public relations going international?
7. Are retailers hypocritical in exploiting Christmas without recognizing Christmas?

By Patricia Thompson and Emma McCleary

There is a wonderful passage in Spike Milligan’s satirical novel Puckoon in which, having partitioned a town overnight, a motley crew of boundary commissioners pose for a commemorative photograph.

The photo session descends into chaos and one of their number suffers the indignity of being captured for posterity with a hat stand protruding from the top of his head.

Various obstacles sticking out of heads, strange shadows on walls, reflections in windows – all are fairly common mistakes in amateur photography.

Even professionals can fall into the trap. My chief bridesmaid – a Sunday school teacher – was snapped in front of a tree at our wedding with two protruding twigs giving her ‘devil’s horns’ resulting in her being permanently framed on our mantelpiece looking like something from a Hell Pizza advert.

Former premiership footballer Stan Collymore suffered a similar photographic faux pas after being pilloried in the UK media over his stormy relationship with TV personality Ulrika Jonssen. Shortly afterwards he signed for Leicester City, aka the Foxes, posed for press shots in front of the club logo featuring a pointy-eared fox head and a devilish looking image of him was promptly splashed all over the tabloids.

That howler was, however, an exception. Sub-editors are notoriously eagle-eyed and the more likely reaction will be some choice language and savage prodding of the ‘delete key’.

A picture speaks a thousands words – providing a good-quality photograph with a story, be it a sponsor’s presentation, company event or a portrait to accompany an opinion piece or appointment announcement, makes it more likely your story will be used – and used well.

The advent of digital cameras means that it is now perfectly possible for pretty much anyone to produce decent quality photographs. Being perfectly possible, of course, doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen – yes, digital cameras will do pretty much everything for you short of brewing a coffee and doing the housework, but they aren’t foolproof.

First you have to remember to take your camera to the event. For those who forget, don’t even bother reaching for the cellphone. While the resulting shot may look fine on Facebook it will never be of sufficient quality for newspaper, magazine or newsletter purposes.

So, digital camera in hand, what next?

Ten top tips for taking great photos

1. Take a high-resolution photo regardless of what you’re using it for on the day. You can always reduce the quality of the photo but you can’t increase it. For print purposes your photo needs to be at least 500kb.
2. The easiest way to sort out what are high-res photos is to set your camera so it stores the least number of photos on your memory card. The bigger the photo, the fewer photos the camera can store. Can’t find that setting button? Get out the manual.
3. It’s not vain to want to look good in a photo. Do your hair; wash your face, open your eyes and smile.
4. If you’re taking a photo to illustrate a story then encourage your subject to do something that is relevant to the story rather than just staring at the camera. If the story is about your shop then perhaps take a photo at the shop counter? If it’s about your winning sausages, include the sausages.
5. Make sure the horizon line in the background is straight.
6. After taking the picture check it on the camera to ensure it’s in focus – if it’s fuzzy take another.
7. Follow the light – make sure your photo subject has the light on their face, not behind them.
8. Check the background – it doesn’t matter if you’re looking as good as New Zealand’s Next Top Model if your ratty old handbag can be seen or worse – your competitor’s logo across the street.
9. At Ideas Shop, if we need one good photo we take about 20 because that gives us lots to work with.
10. Take landscape (horizontal) and portrait (vertical) shots and long shots as well as head and shoulder shots – that provides a sub-editor with more choice when designing a page. Remember to provide a caption identifying who is in the photo.

Auf Online Business Plattformen, kann man sich gegenwärtig bereits Referenzen aussprechen (z.B. auf Xing.com). Die Reputation einer Person ist von entscheidender Bedeutung, nicht nur in der Analyse durch potenzielle Arbeitgeber sondern viel mehr durch die unterschiedlichen Referenzen über die Personen im Internet gesucht werden. Die Herausforderung ist es dabei darauf zu achten auch persönlich immer in der richtigen Form aufzutreten (z.B. in Yasni). Diese Form des Auftritts und die allgemeine Internetreputation wird von der Plattform Dein guter Ruf analysiert.

Der nachfolgende Link führt auf einer externe Seite. Bitte lesen sie vor dem Anklicken den Disclaimer.
www.deinguterruf.de

At a conference in Malaysia, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said the Suggested Users List (SUL), a boon in followers for anyone on it, will be going away sometime in the future:

“That list will be going away,” Stone said at a conference in Malaysia. “In its stead will be something that is more programmatically chosen, something that actually delivers more relevant suggestions.”

See that term? “Programmatically chosen”. Hmmm…

The SUL was hand picked by the staff of Twitter. Which meant if you weren’t included on the SUL, it felt like a snub if you had established a large presence on the service. It was also celebrity-heavy, which was nice if that’s your thing. But people have a range of interests beyond Hollywood and music.

How do you suppose suggested users will be be “programmatically chosen”? My guess is that is that this new reputation score we’ve been hearing about will be part of it.

More broadly, I could see incorporating the same criteria discussed previously in How Should Tweets Be Ranked in Search Engine Results? including:

1. Relevancy of tweet stream to a subject
2. Crowdsourced signals of authority
3. Effectiveness in providing relevant content

Maybe a new user enters key words indicating areas of interest and the Twitter system returns a set of users to follow. Wouldn’t that be a better way?

This all raw speculation on my part. But it would be cool if they roll out a more effective way to match interests to people.

I came across this infographic behind the GoC firewall. It’s timely given the recent discussions that have been occurring around the future of GCconnex, the GoC’s pilot social networking project.

So not sure of the graphic’s source, but it gives a pretty good breakdown of how social networking has value in the work environment (nitpickers: call it professional networking if you must).

So let’s walk through the chart, starting with the “seekers” side of the equation. With a socnet’s search capacity, I can solve the awareness problem much more quickly than by the usual freind of a friend approach of sending a “do you know of anyone…?” type email to friends and colleagues. And then, by checking out that person’s profile, I can get a sense of their competence before even contacting them. Similarly, by looking at their activity stream, I can see if they are the helpful, sharing type. And then I can contact them directly, or move on to the next prospect.

To me, the key difference here is one of degree — a social workplace lets me get to the answers I am seeking that much quicker and more easily. And the more open a social network is, the more broadly I can broadcast my need, again speeding up getting answers. Problem solved, on to the next one. Productivity win.

Looking at “contributors” column,  it goes both ways. By participating in a workplace socnet , I am opening up myself to the same kind of scrutiny as I apply to others when seeking. Which I think encourages professionalism and responsiveness — I know other socnet members will be evaluating my usefulness to them also, so there’s more impulse to reciprocate and participate.

Actually, I’d say this graphic looks too focused on the individual’s situation in the contributing column. It doesn’t get at the value to the organization very well. Social networking is not simply a means for civil servants to get ahead in their careers.  Rather, the wins on this side of the equation are more reputational — not merely personal rep either, but more significantly that of my team, my organization, and my community. All my actions reflect on the org I work for and the professional community I belong to, and that’s equally (especially)  true in the socnet context. So in terms of contributors, social networking is a great way to strengthen branding at multiple levels.

So two great selling points for GCconnex: making productivity gains and enhancing the public service brand.

Between 1618 and 1967, approximately about 150,000 British children were sent abroad.  Most of the children were sent to Australia after 1920.  To program was operated by the British government, children charities, and religious groups.  The intent was to provide these impoverished children with a better life somewhere other than Britain.  A more cynical view is that the children were to be cheap, white labor for various locations throughout the then British Empire.  Also removing them from Britain reduced a potential burden for the British government.  Many suffered from abuse and neglect.  Collectively they are known as the “forgotten Australians.” 

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd issued an apology to the forgotten Australians on November 16, 2009.  Many of the now adult children attended.  Here is a short description and select comments from the announcement:

“At a ceremony in the Australian capital of Canberra attended by tearful former child migrants, Rudd apologized for his country’s role in the migration and extended condolences to the 7,000 survivors of the program who still live in Australia.

‘We are sorry,’ Rudd said. ‘Sorry that as children you were taken from your families and placed in institutions where so often you were abused. Sorry for the physical suffering, the emotional starvation and the cold absence of love, of tenderness, of care. Sorry for the tragedy — the absolute tragedy — of childhoods lost.’” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/child_migrants_apology

The UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown offered comments on the topic the night before the Australian announcement.  “On the eve of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s apology to the ‘forgotten Australians’, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced he will also say sorry for his country’s part in shipping thousands of children off to other countries.  The BBC reported Mr Brown says ‘the time is now right’ for his Government to apologise to the child migrants.” http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/15/2743368.htm

Barry Walker, now 70, was one of the 30 forgotten Australians to attend.  He was taken from his parents by the state after they declared his parents to be unfit.  He then lived in Ballarat Orphanage for 13 years.  Walker commented:

“’It was quite emotional in the beginning because I thought of a lot of other kids I had known in there and felt like it was recognition of all of us,’ he said.

‘It (the orphanage) wasn’t too bad but it’s hard to explain, you never really had a cuddle and everything was done as a group. He (Mr Rudd) was right when he said you were just a number,’ he said.

‘All the kids supported each other but as you get older you realise what you missed out on.

‘It’s when you’re spoiling your grandkids, you realise.’” http://www.thecourier.com.au/news/local/news/news-features/tears-relief-among-ballarats-forgotten-australians-as-prime-minister-kevin-rudd-says-sorry/1679228.aspx?src=rss

In 2008, Prime Minster Rudd apologized to the “Stolen Generation.”  The Stolen Generation were the children of Australian Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders taken from their families by the state and religious organizations from 1869 to 1969 by acts of parliament.  The actions were taken under the guise of child protection and other rationales but did involve taking children from their families, hence, the term stolen being used.  Here are parts of the apology”

“’We apologise for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians,’ the apology read.

‘We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country.

‘For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.

‘To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.

‘And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.’”  http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23206140-2,00.html

A full text of the apology can be read at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/02/13/1202760379056.html while a video of Rudd’s apology can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3TZOGpG6cM

Questions to Consider

1. Why provide the apologies now for actions then extend back 100 to near 400 years ago?
2. How can the apologies be viewed as a form or reputation management by the government?
3. How does the apology for the Stolen Generation compare to the points in Chapter 12 about apologies?
4. Why would the British Prime Minister talk about the forgotten Australians the day before the Australian Prime Minister’s apology?
5. What do Walker’s comment suggest about how the forgotten Australians felt about the apology?
6. Why does it matter how the target of an apology reacts?
7. What is the value of having the victims attend the presentation of the apology?

A great piece in the new McKinsey Quarterly by Charles Roxburgh about the value of scenario planning prompts me to share our own version of scenario planning we call “issues mapping.”  Whereas Charles uses certain criteria he calls pre-determined outcomes to frame scenarios, we frame our process using four forces: economics, demographics, technology change and culture change.  We map these four forces against the entire value chain of an organization to identify reputation risks and opportunities that arise as these four forces interact over time.  What this process does is it throws into sharp relief how an organization that fails to adapt can go from being a reputation leader to a reputation laggard or be exposed to a crisis that could have been predicted.  Charles offers an example of a pre-determined outcome as used by Shell Oil, a pioneer in scenario planning: “Rainfall in the mountains means flooding in the plains.”  A simple example of our issues mapping process is what happens when a smaller than average 18-34 year old age cohort interacts with a strong economy: front line customer service quality declines because more qualified workers can find better jobs in a strong economy.  The answer — investment in training and supervision.  These are certainly times for companies and organization to take the time to think through the unthinkable.  Issues mapping isn’t a bad way to do it, when reputation is at risk.