Tag: online

What are businesses thinking about?

The City of Sydney Business Awards recognised the best of the city’s commercial communities, but what’s going through the minds of the finalists?

Last night the Sydney Business Awards honoured the city’s best enterprises at a gala dinner where a whole group of great businesses were acknowledged for their great work.

The awards were the result of a three month process where the public voted on several hundred businesses to determine ten finalists in each category. The finalists were then evaluated by judges for each category. I judged the Online Business group.

The Events Agency who organized the awards today sent me a word cloud taken from the winners’ entry forms. This illustrates what the entrants were talking about in their submissions.

A wordcloud of the Sydney Business Awards winners entries
The word cloud of the Sydney Business Awards winners’ entries.

Staff is the biggest issue for businesses, followed by the two instances of ‘increase’ caused by one having a capital and the other not. If we combined the two instances ‘increase’ would probably be the biggest word.

Given training is one of the other big words we can see the real challenge is training up staff. Marketing and funding also figure prominently.

While basic and from a very narrow survey base, that word cloud gives us some ideas of what worries business owners and a base to start answering those challenges.

The word cloud also explains why education, training and industrial relations are such important issues to the business community which is something both politicians and the media should consider.

Overall the quality of the businesses entered into this year’s awards was terrific. In the online section I really struggled to separate the great finalists and there was very little between Appliances Online who won the category and the two runners up.

What’s also interesting is how many of the finalists in other categories had strong online presences, illustrating how the web is important for all businesses.

Congratulations to all the entrants and particularly Climate Friendly who not only won the main Business Award but also the Sustainability and Environmental awards. Glebe Medical Centre was the winner of the Small Business Award and the Healthcare and Fitness category.

For those who didn’t win this year, it’s worth entering next year as good businesses only get better with time. Hopefully we’ll see your business or vote next year.

A website can’t save a dying business

Online tools can’t fix an organisation’s structural problems

The last week has seen some interesting changes in the local online business community.

Embattled department store David Jones’ announced they are following Harvey Norman into an “omni channel strategy”.

Harvey Norman chief executive in turn appeared on national television to state the “internet drives no sales.”

In the political field, it was reported the Australian Labor Party are looking at using Blue State Digital tools to counter voter and member apathy.

Each one in it’s own way illustrates how organisations can be distracted by shiny new technology while ignoring much deeper problems.

In the case of David Jones, the department store ignored their core competencies and tried to ape their down market competitors in milking the financial services cow.

This worked fine while they could offer 24 and 36 month interest free deals and as soon as their partners American Express started charging a monthly “Administration Fee” that business evaporated.

One of DJ’s down market competitors is Harvey Norman, co-founder Gerry Harvey has spent his life building a fortune based upon providing cheap credit to consumers.

It was always going to be a mistake for DJs to compete with Harvey’s as Gerry is far better at the business than the well connected, genteel board of David Jones and their snappily dressed friends in the store’s executive suite.

Worse for DJs, the whole strategy alienated their core markets and while management focused on financial services customers went elsewhere to find the quality goods and services that the upmarket department store should be providing.

For both though, the financial services business model is now fading as the 20th Century debt supercycle comes to an end; consumers no longer want to load up on “buy now, pay later” schemes.

So all the talk of “omni-channel strategies” really doesn’t address the underlying weaknesses in both business.

This disconnect with reality is true in politics as well where the ALP is reported to be considering using the Red State Digital tools that Barak Obama used so well in his 2008 US Presidential campaign.

While the tools are impressive, they don’t address the problem that the electorate – and the member bases of the major political parties – have become rightly disillusioned and disconnected from the political processes that exclude everyone except an increasingly smaller circle of cronies and insiders.

The only good thing that will come of using US political communications tools in the spectacular eruption the first time one of the ALP’s factional warlords encounters a grass roots online campaign like The Great Schlep.

Heck, the resulting furore might even see some of the apparatchiks distracted from partying and whoring on their union credit cards for a day or two.

All the frivolity aside, the reality for the Australian Labor Party, David Jones and Harvey Norman is their problems are far deeper than a well designed website and impeccably executed social media strategy can fix. These organisations need major rethinks about how and why they exist.

It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at the web or how effective your social media strategy is – if the foundations of a business are shaky then a nice “omni-channel strategy” aren’t going to fix things.

For some of organisations, a failure to embrace the online world may be one of the causes for their problems, for many though there are far more basic issues they need to address.

Omni Channel Buzzwords

Can nice phrases save a declining business?

Retailer entrepreneur Gerry Harvey yesterday unveiled his strategy to arrest the declines in his home goods chain’s sales.

One of the key points in his investor presentation was “continued investment in strengthening our Omni channel strategy”.

When asked exactly what an “omni channel strategy” is, Gerry reportedly admitted that until last week he had no idea what it was.

For an entrepreneur whose business model is suffering badly in the face of changed markets, Gerry seems to be remarkably flippant about how he and his team are going to react to the challenges.

Gerry lack of understanding is bad news for his team, because appears there is no management commitment to the major changes Harvey Norman, and many other incumbent retailers, are going to have to make in order to recover the sales and margins they have long been used to.

The “omni channel strategy” is an interesting beast, which was described by Myers CEO Bernie Brooks last April on ABC’s Inside Business.

We’re building our own omni-channel approach, which will include everything from kiosks in store right the way through to being able to provide very good office online up to 250,000 items, free delivery.

What’s interesting with the retailers’ talk of “omni-channel” is the talk of service. Both Myer and Harvey Norman claim customer service is the centre of their strategy but their emphasis in the past has been to reduce customer service.

The reduced emphasis on service has been part of the decline of the both chains; Harvey Norman could get away while consumers were happy committing to “no-interest for 72 months” finance plans, while Myer steadily declined as their key difference with discount chains like K-Mart and Target was eroded.

Hopefully both Gerry Harvey and Bernie Brooks will get their omni channel strategy strategies working, though it will be interesting whether both can get their management teams to re-discover the meaning of “customer service”.

Without getting the service right, their “omni channel strategies” will just appear to be another management buzzword in a declining business.

Facebook and Families

Family use of social media can be problematic

As the Internet has become a normal part of our family lives, social media services like Facebook are becoming important in the way people, particularly our kids, socialise and communicate.

Most of this web use is positive however there are risks with these online tools so we do need to know how to manage social media services and reduce any problems we may have in our families and businesses.

Understand the risks

Facebook is an online service and all web based platforms share the same risks such as stranger danger, bullying, fraud and offensive behaviour – both kids and adults need to understand the risks.

A good start is sitting down with younger kids and using some of the online resources available, the US Virginia Department of Education has a good interactive presentation on online safety.

For Australian specific content, the Federal government’s Cyber Smart website offers advice to families at all ages; from grandparents to kids.

Respect the rules

All online services have rules that govern behaviour, one of the most common is a restriction on under 13s. This is partly because of the US COPPA law that restricts websites and social media services from advertising to children.

Of the other rules that can cause problems Facebook has bans on hate speech and an almost pathological obsession with nudity. It pay to read the terms and conditions so you know what is acceptable.

Under 13s should not use Facebook

While for many kids Facebook is the way to talk to their friends online, parents should resist the pressure to sign their kids up until they are of the legal age.

Regardless of what you think of the rules, many kids don’t have the maturity of to understand or deal with the issues of using social media sites. For that matter, neither do many adults.

Should Facebook find out that an account is owned by a child under 13, they will shut it down immediately.

Choose your friends carefully

Everybody – kids and adults – should be cautious about friends they make online. Just accepting friend requests from anybody, or from those who look cute or cool, can lead to problems later.

Set your privacy

In Facebook you should set your default privacy settings to “Friends”. You can do this by clicking the arrow pointing down in the top right hand corner of the Facebook screen and selecting privacy.

Having set your default privacy settings to Friends, you may want to further improve your privacy by continuing down the privacy screen and selecting functions like not allowing friends to post to your Facebook wall.

Be careful what you like

Liking products and pages can have consequences, at the very least others know what causes you’ve joined.

Joining hate or bullying campaigns or pages is not a good look, so don’t do it if you think you may upset people around you.

You are what you post

Anything you put online is in writing against your name. If it’s going to upset people or cause trouble then don’t do it.

In the United States one teenager found this out the hard way when her father discovered a Facebook post criticising him and her mother. He shot her laptop and then posted the video onto her Facebook page.

Practice Safe Computing

Services do get hijacked, so have strong passwords, up to date virus checkers and make sure the computer is fully up to date with security patches.

Never share passwords with friends or siblings and use different passwords on each service so if Minecraft gets compromised, Facebook or email doesnt’ as well.

Put computers in common areas

Kids’ computers should be in common areas and use of any Internet enabled devices like iPods and mobile phones in places like bedrooms should be strongly discouraged.

Be open to talking

If anyone in your family seems to have a problem with computer use such as getting upset, socially withdrawal or acting unusually then talk to them. This happens with adults as well.

One thing to remember is that punishing people, particularly kids, rarely works well with these technologies so it’s best to make it clear they won’t be in trouble if they come to you with a problem they are having on the net.

It’s not just kids

We have to remember its not just kids who get into trouble online, there’s no shortage of adults who have created problems for themselves and their families through irresponsible online behaviour. So parents need to watch their own social media usage as well.

Should someone in your family be having a problem, then don’t hesitate to talk to the school, employer or Internet provider if there’s issues that need to be addressed.

There’s lot of online services services and resources such as Cybersafe listed above. Also don’t hesitate to call any support lines such as Lifeline or Beyond Blue if you are seriously concerned about a family member’s wellbeing.

On balance, the web and social media are positive influences on most people’s lives so by using commonsense and playing safely, the majority of families will avoid the really terrible stories we hear about online problems.

The death of local newspapers and media

How does the regional press survive in the digital era?

The bankruptcy of Lee Enterprises, publisher of 48 newspapers across the United States, is the  latest episode in the steady decline of local  printed media. Is the newspaper, particularly the local publication catering for a smaller market, dead?

Futurist Ross Dawson certainly thinks so, last year predicting US newspapers won’t exist as we know them by 2017 with them being replaced by digital platforms like the web, iPad and Kindle.

The problem for the media industry is how to fund news gathering in a digital environment. Newspapers are dying because advertisers have moved online, so Google now makes $30 billion a quarter on the income the local paper has lost in classifieds and display advertising.

For web surfers, this is also a problem as much of what appears on the net — in blogs, Facebook, on Twitter and circulated around message boards — comes from newspapers and largely subsidized by their rapidly eroding print revenues. Take out the traditional media, and many of the authoritative online sources disappear.

Much of the free web content we’re seeing is a transition effect as we evolve to paid online models, something that is going to be driven by advertisers following consumers’ eyeballs to the net.

For the publishers who don’t go broke in the meantime, this will probably save them in whatever form they evolve into.

Cutting costs to survive the current lean period is essential for newspapers, the tragedy is many are following other industries in cutting the very areas that give them their competitive advantage while keeping antiquated and expensive management who hang on to failed strategies.

Poor management is probably a bigger threat to the news empires, as it is for many other industries.

The damage done by poor business leadership is far greater than the cost of outsized management salary packages and entitlements. Until shareholders address the number, cost and suitability of the managers charged with running their investments, the future for these organisations is bleak .

Local journalism is going to change as we start seeing old media’s economies of scale being replaced by cheaper technology that allows local people to reclaim their news and community stories.

They will be doing this through blogs and social media while using their mobile phones and cheap cameras to capture and document local news.

For the local newspapers and media outlets who understand and harness their community, they’ll remain valued local commercial citizens; for those who see their readers as a mass of dumb consumers, they’ll be lucky to last the decade.

The mobile payments revolution

Paying bills through a smartphone is going to radically change how we do business

Ten years ago when I was running a computer support business we spent a lot of time trying to find an mobile payment service for our on-site technicians to process payments.

At the time there were plenty of options but they were all expensive, asking 6% in merchant fees at a time when our bank merchant facility charged us 2.75% to accept Mastercard, Visa and Bankcard. Interestingly, the cut the mobile providers wanted to take which was the same commission as American Express and Diners Club.

We’d long before decided Diners and Amex were too expensive and it was easy to make the same decision about mobile payments. The technicians were given a manual card swipe to carry around and they phoned through authorisations. It was messy and time consuming but a lot cheaper than the then high tech alternatives.

Given that history, I was keen to get along to the Australian Information Industry Association’s “Mobile Payments – Cooperate, Collaborate, or Abdicate” breakfast panel held in Sydney last week to see what has changed in the mobile payments space.

The rise of smartphones – and the developing SoLoMo trend among consumers which brings together social, local and mobile technologies – should have meant the era of online payments should have arrived and it’s puzzling why it hasn’t happened.

It isn’t for a shortage of operators; one of the panel members, Oliver Weidlich of Sydney’s Mobile Experience mentioned a number of the services such as Square, developed by one of Twitter’s founders that are changing mobile payment overseas.

Interestingly it was the audience questions that gave the answers to why online payments haven’t taken off in Australia. The key question from the floor was “which authority handles disputes should a phone be lost or stolen”.

As a customer, one hopes it’s the bank that takes responsibility as the idea of a telco – particularly their mobile phone divisions with their attitude towards billing customers – having control over your credit card or bank account would make most consumers’ blood run cold.

The point was well made though as it saw the panel’s bank, telco and credit card representatives all ruminating over the question of ‘who owns the customer’.

Oddly, while they argue about whose property the customer is, all of them may lose out. While services like Square and built in payment features on social media and mobile apps such as Foursquare or Red Laser may take a slice of the market, there is a bigger competitor already making huge inroads.

The day before the AIIA event, Internet payment giant PayPal announced a series of deals with various group buying sites and online applications. Their press release pointed out PayPal’s mobile payments, or mCommerce as they call it, is growing at over 400% a year

While it might not be correct to say PayPal were the elephant in the room at the online payments breakfast, it isn’t unfair to say Big Ears was just outside scoffing the morning tea while the incumbents argued about who would have first dibs on clipping the tickets of both merchants and customers.

It’s too early to say the banks, or the telcos, have lost the market but players like PayPal, Google with their wallet service and possibly even Apple – should a Near Field Communication (NFC) equipped iPhone appear in the near future – are going to make the mobile payment sector far more interesting and competitive.

For businesses, we need to keep a close eye on the mobile payments market as it is promising to offer a lot more options in banking and transactions that what we’ve been used to in recent years. The days of 6% merchant fees are well and truly over.

Is the social media business model dying?

Have the social media companies reached their peak?

Is the social media business model dead?

The frenzied rush to release new features such as Facebook’s latest changes, along with Google’s updates to their Plus platform, may be the first indication the big social media business model is broken.

Driving the adoption of social media services has been the value they add to people’s lives; MySpace was a great place to share interests like bands and music, Facebook’s is to hear what was happening with their families and friends, LinkedIn is for displaying our professional background and Twitter keeps track on what’s happening in the world.

Now the social media services want to be something else, Facebook wants to become “a platform for human storytelling” where you’ll share your story with friends and friends of friends (not to mention the friends of your mad cousin in Milwaukee) while Google+ wants to become an “identity service”.

The fundamental problem for social media services is their sky high valuations require them squeezing more information and value out of time poor users by adding the features on other platforms; so Facebook tries to become Twitter while Google+ desperately tries to ape Facebook and Quora.

Adopting other services’ features is not necessarily what the users want or need; you may be happy to follow a Reuters or New York Times journalist on Twitter for breaking news but you, and them, are probably not particularly keen on being Facebook friends or professionally associated on LinkedIn.

If it turns out we don’t want to share a timeline of our lives with the entire world but just know how our relatives or old school friends in another city are doing, then the underpinnings of the social media giants value may not be worth the billions of dollars we currently believe.

This isn’t to say social media services themselves aren’t going away, it could just be that the grandiose dreams of the online tycoons where they become an identity service or a mini-Internet are just a classic case of overreach.

For Google and Salesforce, whose core businesses aren’t in social media, this could be merely an expensive distraction, but for those businesses like Facebook it could be that Myspace’s failure was the indicator that making money out of people’s friendships isn’t quite the money maker some people think.

ABC Nightlife Computers: The Internet Name Wars

How the Internet’s name wars can affect you

The online empires want our names and identities, are the real costs of social media now being exposed? Our September ABC Nightlife spot on September 22 from 10pm looked at these issues and more.

Paul and Tony discussed how Google’s “Name Wars” or “nymwars” came about, why social media sites like Facebook and search engines want you to use to use your real names.

The podcast from the program is available from at Nightlife website, more details of Tony’s programs can be found there as well.

Is this a good thing or are there costs we should consider before handing over our intimate details to a social media or free cloud computing service?

Some of the topics we covered included;

  • What are the “name wars’?
  • Why do companies like Google and Facebook want us to use our ‘real’ identities?
  • How can they use the information they gather?
  • What problems does that cause for Internet users?
  • Can these problems spill into real life?
  • Are all web services doing this?
  • What are the risks to businesses using social media?
  • Is this the real cost of social media?

Some of the information we mentioned can be found here;

The cost of lunch: Google and Information Revenue
Google’s real names policy explained
Google’s Eric Schmidt on being an “identity service”, not a social network
Google’s company philosophy (note item two)
Why Twitter doesn’t care what your real name is

We’ll be adding more resources in the next few days, the next ABC Nightlife spot is on 20 October and our events page will have more details. If you have any suggestions for future programs or comments on the last show, please let us know as we love your feedback.