Who do you work for

It's such a common question that we hardly notice its meaning. 'Who do you work for?' We barely notice it even when we talk about someone - as I did yesterday - who 'works for me' or 'used to work for me'. Yes, mostly we take it to mean 'who do you report to?', or 'who pays your wages?'. Let's be clear though, its implications are quite different. The real answer may be that you are working _for_ yourself and your family, you are saving for a house or for retirement, you are making your contribution to society. In a few cases this might be entirely consistent with the answer you actually give when someone asks you the question. For many of us though, I suspect the answer we give is 'I work for Derek / Sheila / your boss or company's name here': and that just isn't true.

NLP people will tell you that our brain believes what we say out loud. Even if it's not true, even if that's not what we really think.

So when someone asks 'who you work for', think about your answer, and say out loud something that you want your brain to believe. And when you start to talk about an ex-colleague as 'someone who used to work for me', then maybe we could think of a fairer way of saying that too.

Managing complex data-driven marketing projects

Part of the reason for setting up my business Neon Nelly, is to promote the use and understanding of integrated cross-media direct marketing campaigns. They work better for clients, they make more sense to customers.

They are not difficult to manage, but they are different. So I've just published a template on the web to help manage data-driven direct marketing campaigns. There's a pdf version for download too. Happy to hear comments and suggestions for improvement, and very happy for you to pass on the details to others.

Rapid development

You probably know I'm on a mission to make a step-change in return on investment for direct marketers. Combining the power of data and design, and working in a new way to deliver fast, effective campaigns that just work.

The current issue of the journal from the Institute of Direct Marketing (IDM) includes a review of some of the techniques and tools I am using to support our service delivery (and if you're not a member, then the journal alone should persuade you to join).

So I thought, perhaps, my timing was about right for the launch of this new service.

Then I looked up a company called Blue North in Canada. There's a salient, passionately argued piece there on personalisation from one of their founders about the importance of these developments, and the different operational model it demands. It's dated 2003.

I think I'd better get a move on.

photo: chadh

Director as leader

Fascinating to watch the director Danny Boyle on television coverage of the BAFTAs last night. He was gloriously happy when his colleagues won awards. He was anxious and eager for them to speak well and say the right thing in their acceptance speeches. There was not a single moment where you could see him thinking about himself or about his own chances of an award. Then listen to the humility and humanity of his own accpetance speech.

One of his colleagues, the production designer I think, said of him that 'he pushes me forward, and he trusts'.

Sounds like a great leader.

photo: marioladeira

Social Networking: The New CRM

Oh. It's happening again. Last time it was CRM, which started out as a really powerful idea and approach to marketing, and finished as an almost meaningless acronym that signified nothing more than an attempt at intelligent marketing. As if there were any other kind ...

Now - already - it seems to be Social Networking. Lots of excitement and discussion, yet already it's being diluted and diverted. For a great explanation of Social Networking, and how it works, see Chris Brogan's blog today. Meanwhile on the BBC television news today, they talk about receiving thousands of pictures (of bad weather in South East England) from their audience as a 'fine example of social networking'. Full marks for picking up on a hot topic. Not very many marks at all, in my view, for actually understanding it.

photo: artnow314

Lines of communication

I asked my MP a question, and he has replied. He didn't answer the question, but he did reply, which is pretty much what I expected.

So I now have an envelope from the House of Commons and some headed paper, and his own signature in ink. Which is nice.

Except I didn't write him a letter. I left a message on his website, which included my email address. So I rather thought I might get an email back. Instead of which he's wasted someone's time composing, printing and posting a letter, never mind the cost of postage. Which is ironic, given that his reply was about getting the best value for government money.

Listening to customers means more than listening to what they say, it also means listening to how they say it.

photo: skype nomad

Tending the greenery

Earlier today I attended the official launch of a new standard for the environmental performance of direct marketing.

There is some very good news here. There will be a proper BSI kitemark which can be included on qualifying material to demonstrate to consumers that something is being done. There are assessment tools, progressive levels of qualification, and a system that's got the independent credibility of the British Standards Institute. And it ties in with the Royal Mail's launch of Sustainable Mail (although this hasn't actually been approved by Postcomm yet) where there's actually a price advantage for doing the right thing.

One of the tools - see the greendm site here - might cause a ripple for companies who have spent considerable time and effort developing their own bespoke tools to calculate environmental effects of marketing campaigns.

Next step is to see how this works out in reality. A couple of financial services clients are lined up to run pilot projects very soon, and doubtless there will be lessons to learn.

The bit I don't understand, is why the DMA is not making compliance a mandatory requirement for membership. DEFRA (who were part of the launch) made it clear again that it would intervene if the industry did not take sufficient voluntary action to meet its targets for waste prevention and reduction. Yet the DMA people talked about the 'competitive advantage' which would accrue to businesses who followed the new standard, and that compliance was voluntary.

There's a disconnect here. Surely if this initiative is the DMA's best shot at satisfying DEFRA, then they should enforce it across their membership? If only a few companies go for this 'competitive advantage', then we don't meet our targets, and DEFRA will have to step in. DEFRA is unlikely to work with the DMA the second time around.

Once I've had a chance to read the technical details about the scheme (there were about six printed copies available this morning, and I was at the back of the room ...) I will post again.