Category: demographics

  • Facebook’s struggle to stay relevant

    Facebook’s struggle to stay relevant

    Are we getting sick of Facebook? Tech magazine CNet stirred up the interwebs on the weekend with the claim that Teenagers are Tiring of Facebook  a meme was pushed by the New York Times’ Nick Bilton dissecting his experience with the service.

    It’s not just teenagers moving away from social media sites though, many adults are getting sick of intrusive adverts and promoted posts getting in the way of the news about family and friends.

    As an example, here are the ads taken off the page of one fifty year old woman’s feed.

    facebook-advertisements-sponsored-ad facebook-advertisements-inline-ad facebook-advertisements-banner

    “I find these offensive” she says, “I’ve been posting my results from a fitness program and now my Facebook page is plastered with ugly weight loss advertisements.”

    Clearly the targeted advertisements are working too well and clumsy marketers are destroying the user experience with ugly and offensive ads.

    Not that those ads are working as Nick Bilton found when he decided to promote a post to his 400,000 followers.

    From the four columns I shared in January, I have averaged 30 likes and two shares a post. Some attract as few as 11 likes. Photo interaction has plummeted, too. A year ago, pictures would receive thousands of likes each; now, they average 100. I checked the feeds of other tech bloggers, including MG Siegler of TechCrunch and reporters from The New York Times, and the same drop has occurred.

    When he decided to advertise, his engagement went up by ten times. Leading Nick to conclude that Facebook were suppressing his unpaid posts while pushing the one’s he pays to promote.

    Even for advertisers, a few hundred likes doesn’t translate into much of a return.

    That suppression of useful posts is one of the reasons teenagers are moving, one 17 year old I asked about why he’s moved from Facebook said the ads cluttered up his feed.

    Which leads us to the reason why people use Facebook – they use it to talk to friends and relatives; not to watch ads.

    It took commercial radio and television a decade to figure out the right mix of advertisements and contents, a balance that is still tested today. Social media sites are going to have to get that mix right soon.

    Facebook has the most at stake and their time is running out.

    Similar posts:

  • Graphs, damn lies and the middle class

    Graphs, damn lies and the middle class

    Graphs are great for illustrating a story, and also excellent at misleading people.

    A good example of where a graph can give an incorrect impression is the Sydney Morning Herald’s story Whatever Happened to the Middle Class.

    The story is a very good explanation of the predicament Australia’s political classes have put themselves into – exacerbated by their 1950s view of dividing the workforce into poorly paid ‘blue collar’ workers and affluent ‘white collar’ office staff – but it suffers from the selective use of headline graphs.

    Viewing the big picture

    The first graph shows how Australians are identifying themselves as middle class and the trend looks staggering,

    Graph of How Australians see themselves as middle class

    Now if we add those who identify themselves as working class, the picture looks even more dramatic with some pretty volatile swings,

    A graph showing How Australians see themselves as middle or working class

    However if we now add in those who identify themselves as rich, or upper class, we get a better perspective as the entire range is now shown,

    Graph showing How Australians see themselves as upper middle or working class

    Selective choosing the Y, or vertical, axis will always give an exaggerated view of a trend or proportion. Once we take the full range in we see the real extent of things. It also has the benefit of showing the trends aren’t as volatile as first appear.

    Middle class perceptions

    When we look at the graph showing the full picture there’s a number of interesting trends and characteristics about Australian society that come out of it which are worthy of some future blog posts.

    Most notably is the identification of Australians being middle class as their property values increased.

    On this point, it’s worthwhile contrasting the Australian experience with the US, here’s a Gallup poll from last year on how Americans see themselves,

    A graph showing how Americans see themselves as upper middle or working class

    While the definitions are different – that Americans differentiate ‘working class’ and ‘lower class’ is interesting in itself – it’s clear that the same trend happened in the US with more people identifying themselves as being members of middle class when their property values were increasing.

    In 2008 and 9 there’s suddenly a sharp increase in Americans identifying themselves as working class as the property downturn bites. The steady increase in those claiming to be ‘lower class’ from 2006 onwards is worth closer examination.

    What this means for Australia

    The implications of the US trends is that any Australian politician intending to dismantle John Howard’s middle class welfare state will have to wait until the property market falls before trying to win any popular support.

    For this year’s Australian election though, what’s clear is that any attempt to stoke the fires of class warfare is going to fail dismally in the outer suburban marginal seats so coveted by both parties.

    We’re going to see a lot more selective graphs during the course of this year, it’s worthwhile taking time to look at them closely. The stories may be different, and a lot more nuanced, than the headlines tell us.

    Similar posts:

  • People like us – could poor hiring practices bring down Silicon Valley?

    People like us – could poor hiring practices bring down Silicon Valley?

    A strange little story appeared in Business Insider a few weeks back, 9 Things Your Resume Needs if you want to be Hired by Apple or Google is a curious view into the mindset of Silicon Valley.

    Purporting to be an extract from a book written by a former recruiter who claims to have worked for Apple, Google and Microsoft, the story exposes a weakness in Silicon Valley and the technological elite which may cause the very disruptions they have unleashed to work against them.

    The nine items are fascinating for the elitist, US-centric view of the world they portray and each is worth investigating on their own.

    If you graduated from an elite college, your chances of getting an interview vastly improve

    Yes, where you went to school does matter to the tech giants. Of course there are exceptions, but McDowell says an Ivy League or other top university will get you noticed.

    There’s not much more to add to this, except to note that the vast majority of students whose families can afford such an education are from the upper middle class.

    The Googles and Apples like to see relevant internship experience.

    If you waited tables when you were 19, that isn’t attractive.

    If you are lucky enough to get into a an Ivy League school on a scholarship or manage to scrape together the money you may still not make the cut.

    To the author, only those with sufficient wealth to participate in unpaid internships are going to get jobs at the top Silicon Valley companies.

    Your major matters

    Sorry liberal arts people or chemical engineers, you’ll need another way in to Google or Apple.

    This is an interesting one, Silicon Valley boosters often talk about the creative process and how coders are artists however according to the recruiter that’s just lip service.

    She encourages students to pick majors that are directly relevant to Google or Apple. Finance, accounting, marketing or computer science majors have the best shot of being noticed by a tech recruiter.  At the very least, minor in one of those fields.

    A focus on finance, accounting and marketing is the same as any old corporation – you could be going for a job with AT&T, Goldman Sachs or the government with qualifications like that. So much for unique.

    Dissing chemical engineering is particularly interesting as Chem Eng graduates have passed one of the toughest university degrees. Whats more, the demands of mobile computing devices means battery technology is one of the most pressing issues facing Silicon Valley at the moment. Chemical Engineers are the folk who will solve this problem.

    Big tech companies like to see people giving back to their communities.

    Volunteering can be a great way to buff up your resume. That said, McDowell warns: “don’t serve soup in a soup kitchen.”

    Instead she suggests hunting for a sales or marketing position, or offering to help a charity with its website and design.

    This is a really obnoxious statement – basically saying we want to you volunteer, but we don’t want you to help people.

    Just how many sales and marketing people are needed by soup kitchens, volunteer fire brigades or community pantries is open to debate.

    A bigger issue with this mentality is that it favours bureaucrats and paper shufflers rather than doers. Which again is something anathema to the public statements of Silicon Valley’s leaders.

    They also like good spellers and speakers.

    Writing and communications skills aren’t just necessary for media jobs. They’re important in any career you’ll have.

    Well, duh.

    If you are buddies with college professors, that’s a plus.

    Professors aren’t just impressed by how you do in their classes.  McDowell suggests helping them with research projects, asking for help and attending office hours, or becoming a teaching assistant.

    That doesn’t hurt, but it’s pretty basic vanilla advice and again it’s tough luck if you have to do a shift at the local fast food restaurant so you can feed yourself.

    Show you understand multiple positions at Google or Apple

    If you want to work at one of the top tech companies, it helps to have at least a basic understanding of multiple positions in the organization.  McDowell calls this being a Generalist.

    On one hand this advice makes sense but on another many technical roles are not generalist positions.

    Generally having a knowledge of the company’s structure and roles is going to look good to any interviewer, assuming you can get past the gatekeeper at the recruitment company.

    Entrepreneurs have a better shot of being hired.

    This is a funny one, if you’re a real entrepreneur then the thought of working in cubicle at Apple or Microsoft while answering to a middle manager straight out of a Dilbert cartoon ranks with getting hot pine needles thrust under  your toenails.
    One of the conceits of modern corporate life is that they value entrepreneurs and the free-wheeling spirits – the truth is they don’t and the first true hint of entrepreneurialism among the ranks will be smothered quickly with a deluge of paperwork.
    Funnily enough, being a successful tech entrepreneur is a path to getting a good job at a tech company although it’s more likely to happen as an acqui-hire than through a recruiter.

    Good news: Your GPA doesn’t matter very much

    Most people think tech companies, Google in particular, harp over candidates’ GPAs. McDowell says there is little truth to that rumor.

    This is only good news if you’ve ticked most of the other boxes, which means you’ll be considered if you’re middling graduate from Stanford or Harvard but forget it if you went elsewhere, regardless of how good your marks are.

    The danger of recruiters

    What the Business Insider story really illustrates are the risks of relying on third party recruiters as gatekeepers to filter out new employees.

    Regardless of how good the recruitment consultant is they are going to apply their own cultural filters and biases onto the selection process and as a result knock out most good candidates.

    More importantly, a company risks developing a monoculture if the recruitment process is too effective at filtering out people who don’t fit a narrow stereotype.

    A new breed of officemen?

    Reading the Business Insider story leaves one with the feeling that many of these companies are beginning to look like IBM in the 1960s – monocultures more concerned about the colour of an employee’s tie and choice of shirts rather than the talents they bring to the organisation or the value they can add to customers.

    This is probably the greatest risk of all to the tech industry, that they end up with an insular group of people with fixed mindsets.

    Should that happen, then the wave of disruption Silicon Valley has unleashed on the world will end up being the industry’s undoing as smart kids working out of garages in Michigan or slums in Delhi will out innovate the staid, comfortable incumbents.

    It’s also interesting to consider how many other industries are now suffering after several decades of similar recruiting practices where leading businesses are now dominated by insular, unworldly monocultures.

    Image courtesy of Alexfurr on SXC.HU

    Similar posts:

  • Seniors and smartphones

    Seniors and smartphones

    One of the opportunities with Android based smartphones is the ability for companies to offer modified phones aimed at certain industries and markets.

    Ahead of next week’s Mobile World Congress, Fujitsu has announced a phone designed for seniors with larger icons and a less sensitive touchscreen.

    The senior market is one that’s been ripe for savvy manufacturers as older people move onto smartphones and demand devices that meet their needs.

    Over the years there had been attempts at mobile phones designed for seniors but most of them had been pretty lame and none had sold well.

    The difference with smartphones is that most of the design changes are involved in the software and with open source platforms like Android and Ubuntu it makes it easier for companies to build easy to use devices.

    Now it’s fairly easy to make these devices, we can expect to see more of them and as smartphones are becoming cheaper – a quick look at the Alibaba website shows wholesale prices for Android based phones as low as $10 (although you have to buy a container load of the things.)

    There’s some opportunities for some smart entrepreneurs with these devices and we’ll see some interesting smartphones aimed at certain groups.

    Similar posts:

  • Why you won’t retire

    Why you won’t retire

    Outliving Our Super is the headline of an Australian Financial Review story on the problems of an aging population.

    Jacqui Hayes cites a billboard in San Francisco declaring that life expectancy will soon be 150 and we have to plan for longer retirements.

    The flaw in this discussion is the idea of retiring in our 60s. When the age pension was introduced in 1910, a new-born boy could expect to live 55 years and a girl, 59 years. The odds were against the average person every receiving the pension which was an effective, if ruthless, way of ensuring the solvency of social security programs.

    A hundred years later, a new born can expect to live well into their eighties. Meaning the average person will spend two decades in retirement.

    Making matters worse is the nature of that Millennial’s work pattern – when great, great grandpa entered the workforce in the 1920s,  he was almost certainly in his early teens and worked a solid fifty years paying his taxes before prospect of retirement arrived.

    Today, that child won’t enter the workforce until at least their late teens and more likely until their early twenties. A modern child is also going to have a much more fragmented work career and will likely have periods of unemployment or low earnings as a casual or contract worker.

    For today’s child to retire at 65 it would mean he or she will have had to saved enough over a forty year working life to sustain them for fifteen years of retirement, those numbers are tough and to achieve it most won’t be living the millionaire lifestyle during their golden years.

    With a life expectancy of 150, the early twentieth century model of retiring at 60 or 65 means today’s child would spend less than 30% of their lives in the workforce. Put simply, the numbers don’t add up.

    The reality is most of us won’t be retiring at 65, the baby boomers reaching retirement age now are learning this and it’s a lesson that’s going to get harder for the Gen X’s and Y’s following them.

    As a society, or an electorate, we can pretend there’s no problem and policy makers and politicians will pander to our refusal to face the truth by keeping structures that reflect early Twentieth Century aspirations rather than Twenty-First Century realities.

    We have to face the reality that the retiring at 65 is unaffordable dream for most of us. Once we accept this, we can get on with building longer lasting careers.

    Picture of pensioners courtesy of andreyutzu on SXC.HU

    Similar posts: