Bloghound

Jerry Yang of Yahoo yesterday blogged (“OK, so now what?” ) about Microsoft’s decision to withdraw its offer. I give Yang credit for writing something and allowing comments, which is more than most CEOs do.

But Yang’s post doesn’t sound genuine; it sounds like something the corporate PR folks wrote in a committee. Too bad. In today’s world, people want the real language of the person behind the ideas. After reading the post my reaction was, “Does Yang really care — or is this just a PR move?”

A better approach would be to give the CEO a few of the major points that communications thinks should be conveyed — and then let him express it in his own words and style. Who cares if the words and grammar aren’t perfect. Neither are real people.

The novelty of blogging is about to wear off, said Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz at this week’s Web 2.o Expo in San Francisco. It’s becoming just another way to communicate.

The bigger point, said Schwartz, is having something provocative to say.

“If you say undifferentiated things that are expected, then you shouldn’t expect anyone to care.”

Amen. So many businesses are obsessed about how to use blogs or social networks that they overlook the fact that you have to have something interesting to say. The point of my book Beyond Buzz is just this:

in today’s “talk” world — online and in person — having an interesting or provocative point of view is as essential, maybe more so, than traditional marketing and communications “messages,” elevator statements, value props, etc.

A provocative point of view gets attention, gets people involved, and speeds understanding. As Schwartz knows, if you want to get interest, be more interesting.

What is the candidates’ language saying about them? This excellent CBC story provides some in-depth analysis. Here are highlights:

Using his text analysis software program University of Texas professor James Pennebaker, says that:

• Barack Obama, through his use of language, appears cognitively complex, socially skilled, genuine and sensitive, though he appears more emotionally volatile than the other two candidates.
• Hillary Clinton and John McCain seem more emotionally stable than Obama.
• McCain comes across as quite optimistic.

Using his model that determines the amount of deception and spin in candidates’ language, Queen’s University computing science professor David Skillicorn believes:

• Obama is the king of spin.
• McCain is the most forthright.

• Clinton speaks more or less candidly, although lately, she has been using more and more spin.

The language analysis science is fascinating. The question, however, is whether voters will detect the same conclusions as the software and how it will influence their decisions.

(Hint: It did in the last U.S. presidential election, as this post explains.)

Maybe it’s time to retire the war metaphor from business and marketing. “Winners” no longer defeat the competition by battling them, capturing customer share, locking customers in or making them loyal. (Sounds like some sort of waterboarding torture done to customers.) The new metaphor may be tribalism.

Widipedia’s definition of tribalism: “Due to the small size of tribes, it is always a relatively simple structure, with few (if any) significant social distinctions between individuals… it is a precondition for members of a tribe to possess a strong feeling of identity for a true tribal society to form.”

In the book Consumer Tribes editors and university professors Bernard Cova, Rob Kozinets and Avi Shankar take a deep dive to examine how tribes work and possible implications to business and marketing. Here are a few highlights I found particularly interesting:

“The allure of the primitive, of the tribal, lies in its ability to arouse our desires and passions.”

The concept of a tribe is at the same level as that of entrepreneur and craftsperson. A craftsperson is a creative person who believes in a passion and transforms this into a business idea. This passion pushes the craftsperson to share ideas and emotions with other individuals sharing the same interest, thus forming a tribe.”

Takeaway: tribes need to be built around passions. If you’re considering a business community the first question to ask: how passionate are people on this particular topic/issue? If the passion exists, in what ways do people want to tap into the issue - learning from “experts,” sharing their experiences, helping others, simply being identified with the issue in some way? What business value might there be for us to be associated with this issue?

“The most potent tribes are built in the interstices, in the margins, on the fringes.”

Takeaway: some of the most thriving business communities are likely to be around issues that aren’t “core” to your value proposition or business strategy, but tap into passions on issues that are on the edges. If a goal is to engage customers or employees, we need to open up to those fringe issues that matter to them - vs. just the messages we want to convey. There may be more value sitting on the margins than anyone inside the company realizes. Also, creating “a” community may be a flawed strategy; perhaps a better approach is facilitating many tribes or communities around many issues.

“One of the most important ways in which members of a cool tribe distinguish themselves from mass culture is through an emphasis on authenticity….Authenticity is in any case a deeply ideological discourse that denigrates popular culture and privileges the exclusive.”

Takeaway: To really connect with cool people companies have to be willing to hear people talk about why the old ways and products are lacking (or worse.) Even if we’re hosting a community, people are likely to bash beliefs and products that we hold true. If we’re going after cool and innovative, we have to be prepared to hear the negative. Second, cool people want to be insiders and have exclusive access to information, ideas, and people. For companies, this may mean embracing smaller communities, where access and inside information is granted to the cool few. Once a community gets big and accepted by the mainstream, it may no longer be a community.

“Companies do not need to send totally coherent messages to the marketplace. Consumers fill in the blanks, and they often do a better job of colouring in the picture than marketers would do.”

Takeaway: Do we spend much too much time and resources trying to perfect messages? Perhaps it’s better to get our products and services out in the market and take a more iterative approach to branding and messaging, tuning in to what our tribe members have to say. This idea is similar to what Harvard Business School marketing professor John Deighton has said for many years, “Marketers offer brand ideas to the market, but those ideas don’t truly become brands until they are accepted, adopted and made over afresh as part of the lives of those who use them.”

Tribes, influence and persuasion

In thinking about tribalism, it’s interesting to go back to a Harvard Business Review article Robert Cialdini, author of Influence: The Science of Psychology, wrote in 2001, titled “Harnessing the Science of Persuasion.” Many of his fundamental principles of persuasion are also principles of effective tribes, social networks, online communities, and groups.

1. The principle of liking: people like those who like them. (Uncover similarities and offer praise.)
2. The principle of reciprocity: people repay in kind. (Give what you want to receive)
3. The principle of social proof: people follow the lead of similar others. (Use peer whenever it’s available.)
4. The principle of consistency: people align with clear commitments. (Make the commitment active, public and voluntary.)
5. The principle of scarcity: people want more of what they can have less of. (Highlight unique benefits and exclusive information.)

Cialidini had one other principle, which may not be relevant in a tribal culture: The principle of authority: people defer to experts.

Perhaps we do defer to experts. But who are the experts we defer to today? Aside from those we respect and trust in our various tribes, who do we listen to? And what are the implications to marketing?

War metaphors stunt problem solving

For starters, let’s stop using the war metaphor in marketing and think in new ways. Linguists have found that people who frame problems in a militaristic manner tend to have a limited perception of the problem and how to tackle it. As noted Berkeley cognitive linguist George Lakoff has said, “This is not language, this is the way people think.”

I’m thinking tribes. And you?

  After a hectic week of meetings and presentations I was reflecting on why so much of the communications fell flat, failing to motivate or influence. The speakers and meeting leaders were smart, experienced people yet they failed to connect.

Maybe they forgot to act like five-year-olds. When I was researching my book Beyond Buzz I learned that adults learn with their five-year-old minds. Here’s what it means for communications and marketing.

The five-year-old likes to argue and reason; uses words like “because.”

Explain why and why not.

The five-year-old uses five to eight words in a sentence.

Keep it brief; use short sentences.

The five-year-old is interested in cause and effect.

Explain, “if we do this, then this is what will happen. If we don’t do this, these are the likely consequences.”

The five-year-old understands and uses comparative terms.

Use more analogies to help understanding.

The five-year-old enjoys creating and telling stories.

Storytelling remains one of the best ways to make meaning and help people understand, remember and repeat ideas.

The five-year-old uses swear words to get attention.

Use more disruptive ideas and language.

The five-year-old likes simple rules.

Don’t make things too complicated.

The five-year-old has a good sense of humor.

Keep a perspective; lighten things up.

How do you change the perception of museums being boring places for intellectual, rich people — and still not alienate your core market? Maybe take a page from MoMA — page A5 of today’s Wall St. Journal to be exact.

• The full page ad thanks a sponsor, Target, for supporting free visitor nights. (There goes the price issue.)

• Referring to a new Helvetica exhibit the ad says, “Just thinking about Helvetica totally makes us want to get down and party.” Get down and party? (There goes the stuffy museum image. And who knew type was considered art?)

• And then the party really kicks in. “We’ll clear out a dance floor and check out the finest collection of modern art in the world. We’re going to rock out to Philip Glass all night long and gab to somebody we just met about how much Expressionism inspires us. (Museums aren’t just for art — there’s dancing, a chance to meet new people on Friday nights, and you’re likely to get inspired. Talk about adding “new features” to your brand. )

Here’s the full text. Accessible. Conversational. Strategic. Nice.

Thank you.

This is a message from MoMA to thank Target for their generous support of Target Free Friday Nights and to commemorate the arrival of our millionth free visitor this past Friday evening. It is set in 29-point Helvetica Roman, widely considered the official typeface of the twentieth century. Helvetica conveys an undeniably modern aesthetic clarity and is in fact the subject of an exhibition at MoMA. Just thinking about Helvetica totally makes us want to get down and party. Maybe its the triple Chococcino talking here, but suddenly we feel like screaming, ‘Thanks a million Target!” while mingling outside in the Sculpture Garden. Okay folks, here’s what we do: Meet us up on the third floor and check out the finest collection of modern art in the world. We’re going to rock out to Philip Glass all night long and gab to somebody we just met about how much Expressionism inspires us. Then,if the mood is right and all our planets are aligned, we’ll show our new friend what Expressionism really means. It happens every Friday from 4 - 8 p.m.

While there are some amazing writers online, there seem to be far fewer great interviewers based on listening in to many podcasts, webinars and vlogs. Today over at the International Association of Online Communicators I share some ideas for improving interviewing skills. Read more.

I’m guest blogging over at the International Association of Online Communicators. Here’s today’s post.

What does a person’s writing say about the person? Plenty, especially if you learn how to use the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) program developed by James Pennebaker and colleagues at the University of Texas at Austin.

You run text through the program and it categorizes words into 70 linguistic or psychologically-relevant categories. I inputted the several recent blog posts from three popular CEO bloggers — Paul Levy, CEO of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Bob Lutz, vice chairman of GM, and Bill Marriott — and here are the partial results:

Some admittedly oversimplified takeaways:

· Bill Marriott comes across as most honest, outgoing, and positive.

· Paul Levy appears to be especially intelligent, with highly cognitive and big words; he’s also quite outgoing and more negative than the other two CEO bloggers. Interestingly he’s done an extraordinary job of turning around Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital and has been writing about union issues, which may account for the negative emotion.

· Bob Lutz comes across honest and smart.

What does this have to do with online communications? It’s an area I’m studying and have no answers yet, just some questions I’d like to ask you:

· Should we “test” executives writing and analyze it before they start blogging on behalf of the company? If they score very negative, low on honesty and low on cognitive thinking – would this person be a good representative of the company?

· Does using an analysis tool like this help us be more aware of our selves – and help us change our language, and, in turn, change our behavior?

· Is it a good tool to coach others in communicating in this new conversational world? (Note that many people think that using the first person “I” is not professional and makes you seem too self-absorbed. But linguistics has found that not to be so; use of the first person implies honesty.)

· Should we never talk about this tool as it may scare execs about being naked out in the blogsophere – especially if they aren’t all that buff when it comes to being positive, cognitively complex and honest?

· Lastly, can writing a blog every day make us healthier? (Studies have proven that writing about personal topics 15 – 30 minutes a day improves people’s emotional and physical health.)

Why is John Edwards lagging Clinton and and Obama in the Democratic presidential race? It may be his use of language. Not the words and “messages,” but his style.

A study published in the Journal of Research in Personality, “Winning words: individual differences in linguistic style among U.S. presidential and vice presidential candidates,” computer analyzed the linguistic styles of Bush, Cheney, Kerry and Edwards during the 2004 campaign across six linguistic style categories related to voting behaviors and political personality characteristics.

Some highlights of the findings, by James Pennebaker, Richard Slatcher, Cindy Chung and Lori Stone:

• Edwards’ language was the most feminine. (Studies show that when asked to describe ” a good president” 61% of the participants characterized the role as masculine and 0% as feminine. The remaining percent were androgynous or undifferentiated.)

• Edwards’ language use was the least presidential. (The Republicans used much more presidential language than the Democrats. Presidential language is has high levels of articles, prepositions, positive emotions and big words.)

• Edwards used more depressive language than Bush or Cheney; Kerry was most similar to a depressed person. (Studies show voters are most favorable toward candidates who are the most optimistic.)

• Edwards and Bush were the least cognitively complex in their use of language. (Cheney was the most cognitively complex — his style being the most concrete, complex, and detached.)

• Edwards and Cheney were similar in honesty of their language; both of the vice presidential candidates’ language was more honest than Kerry or Bush.

According to James Pennebaker, professor and chair of the psychology department at the University of Texas at Austin and developer of the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software program that categorizes words into linguistic and psychological categories:

“Over the years it has become apparent that is far more important to see how people talked about a given topic than what they were talking about. People’s linguistic styles provide far richer psychological information than their linguistic content.”

It is possible that Edwards’ language use has changed since the last election. Yet this scientific use of language analysis does provide some fascinating clues into why he’s lagging.

PS — I’ll be writing more about what our words can say about us, particularly as it relates to business, when I guest blog at the International Association of Online Communicators next week.

One of the challenges in getting people to believe in a new business concept is having the right words to describe the concept. At the BIF3 Innovation Summit CEOs Robin Chase of GoLoco, Jack Hughes of TopCoder, William Herb of Linear Air, and BIF3 co-host Bill Taylor talked about the importance of messaging to be able to talk about business concepts in ways that resonate –with employees, customers and investors. Without that messaging, it’s difficult to get people to believe in the idea.

How these execs have distilled their concepts to people “get it” quickly:

• GoLoco: personal public transportation system
• Linear Air: car service with wings
• Fast Company magazine: like Harvard Business Review and Rolling Stone combined

All expressed how difficult it is to hone in on those few words that capture the idea. Note how straightforward these concepts are – and how easy it is for other people to use the language.

A few days a go I was talking to a CMO about his company’s new messaging. “We’ve got it done, but I can’t really explain it to you over the phone,” he said. “I need to walk you through the deck.” Sounds like it isn’t done….

.