Foxwood Online Marketing

The New Employee Rating System - Gamification

 

There are more and more articles on gamification, the use of game design techniques and mechanics to solve problems and engage audiences.  I saw an article on LinkedIN News that was a good overview of the subject including 3 companies that are making some noise in this space.  They are Badgeville, Bigdoor, and Bunchball.  In the article they cite a Gartner report that advises all CIOs to have gamification on their radar and a prediction from M2 Research that the gamification market will be close to $3B by 2016.  While there may be huge growth in gamification of process such as software development and social media applications such as Foursquare, my belief is that the real growth potential is with employee measurement/performance reviews.  The target markets for gamification are the Millennials born between 1980 and 1995 and the Generation Zs born 1996 and after.  They grew up with digital devices and one of their favorite pastimes is playing games.  While you may think this activity is a complete waste of time, the feedback/reward in most games has established a model of expectation in these 2 generations they will take with them to the workplace.  While Generation Z are a bit young for the workforce now, Millennials will be 50% of the workforce in 2014.  Given their non-traditional approach to working, it is becoming more apparent that firms must get aggressive in meeting the needs of this growing resource pool to increase overall productivity and reduce turnover.

Bunchball has created a white paper that offers a methodology for companies to use as a model for providing feedback and rating employees using gamification principles.  Here are the basics:

Performance

•     Real-Time Feedback - In a game, anytime you take an action you get immediate feedback positive or negative.  The current state of once-a-year reviews won't work for Millennials.
•     Transparency - In games, players can always see where they and others stand.  Millennials in the workplace want constant metrics on how they are doing.
•     Goal-Setting - In a game the goal may be to "save the princess" with sub-goals like "get to the next level".  At work a sense of progress, however small, will be critical in keeping Millennials highly engaged.

Achievement

•     Badges - Online you have an identity or avatar.  At work your identity is your achievements.  If you receive small tokens of achievement (badges) you are motivated to attain more, increasing your productivity.
•     Leveling Up - Badges are indicators of specific accomplishments, levels are a means of indicating more long term achievements.  Employers my consider adding more levels to their structure to accomplish this.
•     On-Boarding and Mastery - Millennials will NOT read instruction manuals.  They are used to being able to get instant instruction at any point within a game.  Employers need to learn how to provide easy immediate access to teaching aids; this will not be easy.

Social Interaction

•     Competition - Online games always involve competition.  It's there in the corporate world as well whether or not the employer identifies it.
•     Teams - Being part of a team is motivating whether you are playing a game or as an employee participating in a cross-functional team.

I believe any employee of any age would flourish in this rating system.  The problem is the cost of implementation and acceptance by older employees and management.  The carrot here is increased productivity and reduced turnover.  To put the cost of turnover in perspective, the following came from an article in WebProNews:

 70% of Millennials leave their first jobs within 2 years
 Turnover costs (as a share of their salary)
    30% - 50% for entry level employees
    150% for mid level employees
    400% for specialized employees

My opinion is that firms should deploy bi-directional mentoring immediately but also begin developing a gamification model for the not-too-distant future.  Those that do will have more motivated employees and be more competitive in the marketplace.

 

 

 

 

My Website & Blog Are Back Up!

I just got my website, blog, and Foxwood email back up again.  And as you would expect there is a story and a lesson.  A couple of years ago I signed up with an agency ownership program out of Seattle.  Included in my agency fee was website development and hosting support.  Earlier this year the organization decided to get out of that part of the business and focus on marketing and training.  They provided the name of a person and at first it was a seamless transition.  However a couple of months ago I started to have problems with my website.  Sometimes it would be unavailable but my blog and email would work.  A call to the support guy was usually handled quickly even if he was in Texas fighting forest fires.  Then almost a month ago I lost access to all 3.  I had 3 email addresses and 2 phone numbers for my support guy.  I was relentless chasing him without any success.  Considering how he likes to live on the edge I checked the obituaries in Seattle.  I even sent an email through LinkedIn disguised as a connection offer to a man in Seattle with a very similar name.  All the while I was tweeting and sending messages to any social media site the support guy had.  I went on WhoIs to check all the places where my website was found.  I then began filing trouble tickets with each of them.  Finally I read through my support guy's blog to see if there was a clue and I found it.  He said one of his clients had a self-inflicted problem with his site and contacted the server (host) firm claiming they were my support guy.  An argument ensued resulting in the hosting company dropping all of my support guy's clients including me.  Now I knew what happened.  But because I relied on my organization and then this support person, I did not have the proper log-ins and passwords so for a time my trouble tickets went unanswered.  Finally when I contacted the sales department I got a response.  After some long explanations, they turned on my site, blog, and email again.  All is well.  Except the final part of the process is to move everything to a local source, a friend I trust.  AND to get control of the log-ins and passwords.

Actually while everything is back to normal I learned a few tricks just in case.  My website could be copied and pasted from Google Cached Pages.  My blog site, TypePad, had all the content from my blog but none of the videos, links, or images.  And there was even a way to go to the domain company and get a bypass on my email.  Thank heavens I didn't have to do that as there would have been many hours of putting Humpty Dumpty back together again.

So as you might expect, there are lessons.  Don't assume a supplier has completely investigated a substitute if they get out of a particular service.  Don't rely on an "expert" for your ownership responsibilities.  Finally it's always better to do business with someone you know and trust, even if it costs more.  While this adventure appears to be almost over, it certainly was not a pleasant one; and you know, I should have known better!

 

 

Online Security: Baby Boomers VS Millennials

By the way, this report is not about the workplace but I liked the image.

I discovered an interesting survey about the difference in online security perceptions between Generation Y, A.K.A. Millennials, and Baby Boomers from Mashable.  After a little digging I found the entire report on the ThreatMetrix website.  This study was of people in these 2 groups who are active users of the Internet.  On average they spend 24 hours per week with 57% making purchases online daily or weekly.  In spite of this 79% have either some (53%) or serious (26%) concern about fraud when shopping online and 72% are concerned about becoming a victim of online fraud.

The key differences between Boomers and Millennials are:

• Boomers are more concerned about becoming a victim of online fraud. 
• Millennials are more likely to see the security of online commerce as a factor in choosing or using an online merchant.
• Millennials are more likely to own and use a smartphone for mobile payments and other commercial transactions.  Boomers who do own a smartphone are more concerned about smartphone payment security.
• Millennials are more likely to believe fraud risk on mobile devices is lower than laptops or desktops when shopping online.

The results are not totally logical.  Boomers are more concerned about becoming a victim of online fraud but are less likely to consider security as a factor in choosing an online merchant.  It's as if Boomers who shop online realize the risk is higher and are willing to take that chance but not factor in risk when choosing a vendor.  Not that most Boomers or Millennials would be able to identify a site's security strength.  While you can look for security-related patches, who really knows how to judge this?  It's not surprising that Boomers own fewer smartphones than Millennials.  The surprising fact is that Millennials believe fraud risk is lower on a mobile device.  Being more tech savvy you would think they would be aware that many people do not implement security features on mobile devices and there have been many articles concerning security risks from downloaded apps.  There are also devices which can breech security or clone a smartphone if the perpetrator is in close proximity to the user.

My professional experience with security was in 2 areas.  As the implementer of an eCommerce application for a $6B division in 1997, I learned that security added at least a year to the project development time.  The security "nazis" as we called them were a strange breed.  They were into power and seemed to love flaunting it.  Junior level security employees could back down senior level management and seemed to look for these conflicts.  However the offset to their power was their risk.  Should any security breech occur, every one of the security team that signed off on the application would be fired. 

My other experience was when I consulted for a Wireless LAN company recently.  There we had to not only worry about WID (Wireless Intrusion Detection) but WIP (Wireless Intrusion Prevention) which disables any Access Point not recognized as part of the platform.  Here's an example of WLAN fraud.  When businesses charged for wireless access, a thief would sit outside the business in a van.  He would intercept your log-in and claim that the link was broken and asked for your credit card number again.  Other cases involved hacking in through unauthorized Access Points in a business to break into the corporate data bases to capture all the credit card numbers.  What happens in these cases is an employee who did not have good access to the company WLAN would bring in a cheap Access Point thereby opening the network.  This is where WID comes in now.  The interesting fact about wireless fraud in businesses is that there is less serious instances in wireless than in bad guys who figure some way to get in the building and go through an employee's computer.  That's because businesses perceived higher risk from hacking communications going through the air than through a wire which required the WLAN makers to develop better security to break into the market.

Frankly I was surprised that there were not more differences in security concerns between Millennials and Boomers but I guess that's because both groups rate the risk similarly.  That is, the risk is low to the individual, there are security processes built in from credit card companies and banks, and the actual amount you would be liable for is small.  That factored against the convenience and cost savings of shopping online means we are all willing to take on more risk.  I also think that we are rapidly moving down a path where we have fewer and fewer privacy rights which adds to security risk.  With convenience comes risk.  It is a trade-off most of us are willing to accept regardless of age.

 

 

 

Highlights from 2 Presentations at Web 2.0

I discovered there was a big internet trade show recently.  Web 2.0 Summit was in San Francisco and Web 2.0 Expo was in New York.  There were a number of presentations, interviews, and panel discussions as is the case with most trade shows.  What I find especially nice now is how they video most of the sessions so you can watch without having to travel to the sites or pay the large admission fees.  As a corporate warrior for over 20 years I have been to similar events in New York, Las Vegas, LA, Chicago, San Francisco, and Disney World.  My favorite 2 elements presented are visions of the future and surveys of senior executives.  With that in mind I picked 2 presentations; one from an IBM executive who is reporting on a major study among 1700 CMOs (Chief Marketing Officers) and an executive from Intel who laid out their forecast on growth in the Web 2.0 world.

First here's a 15 minute video of Kirk Skaugen of Intel:

Here are the highlights I picked up:

• There was more data transmitted over the Internet in 2010 than the entire previous history of the Internet
• They predict there will be 1 billion more people added to the internet by 2015, up to 2.5B now
• They predict there will be 15 billion connected devices by 2015, up from today's 4B
• The average upscale car next year will have 300 micro-controllers and 12 cameras
• The average car is going from 5 to 50 million lines of code.  Note it only took 10 million to put a man on the moon.
• They say, "If it consumes electricity, it will end up computing, and if it computes it will end up connected to the internet and generating data."
• The big advances in devices will be in vending machines and appliances (maybe the "smart refrigerator" is finally coming)
• One useful application of the explosion of data and computing power is hurricane forecasting.  In 1985 you could predict 48 hours out for an area of 300 miles.  Today that is still 48 hours but for a radius of 100 miles.  The goal is 2 week's notice for a 10 mile radius.  This will limit evacuations to a zip code and enable a focused effort for preparedness and rescue.
• What's enabled Intel to continue to increase computing power is converting transitors to a 3 dimensional format.  It's like adding the ability of a high rise to increase usage of a scarce downtown space.

 

The second presentation is from Cindy Finnecy of IBM and is about 10 minutes:  

Highlights of the study, which can be downloaded from LinkedIn or from IBM's site:

• The CMOs said they have 3 needs:  1) Deliver value to the empowered customer,  2) Foster lasting connections, and  3) Capture value and measure results.  "Marketing must become more adept at managing the magnitude of change now taking place; otherwise it will be like going into battle with a Swiss Army Knife.
• 48% said they are NOT ready for the changes coming in technology
• They said they need to increase the digital IQs of their teams across the board and also infuse a new set of skills.  They need a new class of marketing professional that has financial acumen with the ability to do analytical thinking so that we can divest from lower ROI projects and invest in those activities that have a higher ROI.
• The top activity planned, in terms of increase, was social media at 82% with 81% picking customer analytics in 2nd place
• "We need to replace our CRM (Customer Relationship Management) system and are actively looking at a new system that will address our future plans, including social media, ROI analytics and the global company strategy."
• Of all the main sources of concern (13 criteria), and planned increase in technology use (14 criteria), they are only confident of being able to deal with 2 each of these
• The 2 top areas of pain are data explosion (71%) and social media (68%)

 

 

So my conclusions from these 2 presentations are:  1) If you think you are having a problem with the rate of change in the Internet, you are not alone as evidenced by the CMO study; and,  2) Given the forecast of the rate of increase, you haven't seen anything yet!

 

 

 

 

 

 

My Tribute to Steve Jobs

With the passing of Steve Jobs, I like so many paused to think in retrospect what he and Apple have meant to me.  My first exposure to an Apple product was the Macintosh II in the late 80s.  I was working in Research Triangle Park, NC, for a high tech telecommunications company.  We were growing like crazy (this division had 100 people in HR just to handle relocations) and making money by the train load.  So when the Mac IIs came out we bought 7 or 8 for our group of about 20 product managers.  We had to share them but everyone had their separate files and it was much easier to do email.  We had supporting documents (from the designers) which we could pull from to create our own documents (for sales).  What made an impact on me was the ease of use.  All the applications:  word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations were integrated with the operating system.  Prior to that we used IBM Jr.s and our own product called Displayphone which you may recall seeing used by J.R. Ewing on the Dallas TV show if you are as old as I am.  These machines were great productivity tools but when we got our hands on the Mac, it was a breakthrough.  That's because rather than fighting the poor usability of the IBM or Microsoft platforms, the Mac was easy to use and allowed us to focus on the work.

Over the years Apple introduced new products like the iPod, iTunes, iPhone, and iPad which were credited as breakthroughs but over the years their singular market advantage was ease of use.  Microsoft developed their products from the perspective of functionality.  They created the operating system software and core applications that permitted much more sophistication in the finished products.  So over the years, Macs became the product for right-brained creators like artists and writers whereas Microsoft products were bought by business for us left-brainers.  The overall market was much larger for the functional side which enabled Bill Gates (Microsoft) to become the world's richest person.  The functional side became much more competitive.  IBM moved to the large computing platforms and are now noted for machines like Big Blue and Watson while they make their money on servers (Google has an estimated 1 million servers that can cost roughly $1,500 each).  There were periods when Apple did not do very well.  Partly because they priced their products higher than their more productive alternatives.  Microsoft made lots of money from selling the operating system and applications, but they didn't make the PCs or other hardware.  Apple made everything which enables their integration but results in higher costs and prices.  And while you would think from all the publicity that iPhone dominates the smart phone market, actually there are more Android (Google) smart phones (180K) Vs iPhones (91K) in 2011 with the forecast for Android to have 49% of the market in 2015 as compared to iPhone's 17% in 2015 according to Gartner.  The pattern for smart phones is similar to that of PCs.  Apple breaks through with usability and their competitors eat into their market share with price and functionality until the next breakthrough.  Even in the lean years they maintained their high price which means they have lived with huge business cycles from one extreme to another several times.  This is incredibly painful for both employees and stockholders.

For most of my career I have not been an Apple customer.  I use by Blackberry in lieu of an iPod and iPhone and my computers have all been Microsoft based.  But still I appreciate what Apple has done and is.   Apple is more than Steve Jobs.  But because, as evidenced by the disappointing recent release of iPhone 4S rather than version 5, there may be a more timid regime now in charge.  For Apple to remain as the breakthrough technology we have come to know, the new guys will have to continue to push the envelope, take chances, and get it right.  While I am not one of the Apple enthusiasts, I appreciate and value their contribution to technology, Silicon Valley, and to the United States.  And I believe Steve Jobs had a great deal to do with that success.  So rest in peace Steve, and thanks.

 

 

 

The Connected Car Using Telematics

While battery technology for hybrid and all electric cars has yet to reach a break-through, we appear to be on the edge of huge combinations and permutations of services in communication and information or telematics.  Hughes, a major player for the OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) and aftermarket automobile telematics markets has created a good video of what can be done:

Bill Gates Donates $42M to Reinvent the Toilet

You may have heard about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donating $42 million for research to reinvent the toilet.  Check out the video:

Is the US Getting Serious About Cyber War?

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) just released its Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace.  In the announcement Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III stated that 24,000 Department of Defense files were “lost” in March in a cyberattack on a military contractor. It may be the most damaging breach the U.S. military has seen.  This is a follow-up to the DoD's Quadrennial Defense Report or QDR from February of last year.  This plan involves 5 strategies:

• Treat cyberspace as an operational domain to organize, train, and equip so that DoD can take full advantage of cyberspace’s potential.
• Employ new defense operating concepts to protect DoD networks and systems.
• Partner with other U.S. government departments and agencies and the private sector to enable a whole-of-government cybersecurity strategy.
• Build robust relationships with U.S. allies and international partners to strengthen collective cybersecurity.
• Leverage the nation’s ingenuity through an exceptional cyber workforce and rapid technological innovation.

Are Cellphones Harmful to Us Or Not?

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer just released a report that classified cellphone use as "possibly carcinogenic to humans".  So is it time to throw away the cellphone and go back to landlines?  First, check out this news report on the finding:

Note that this organization has given the same rating on pickled vegitables and coffee.  C-SPAN interviewed 3 people as a segment of their Communicators program about this issue.  To view this, click here .  Dr. Nora Volkow, Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse said she could not come to a conclusion on whether or not cellphone's radiofrequency electromagnetic fields are dangerous.  She did show brain scans that pictured a difference between a person had used a cellphone for 20 minutes and when they had not.  But she repeatedly said the solution was to move the antenna away from the brain.  The use of the speaker or bluetooth headset virtually eliminates the problem.  She said the intensity of the current emitted from the cellphone rapidly diminishes as it is moved away from the brain.  Also on this program were University of Pennsylvania Professor Kenneth Foster and author Devra Davis.  The professor's input was that there were many potential process issues with this study and the author's input was that there have been many studies that do indicate there are risks, especially to children.  Her book, Disconnect, argues that there is strong evidence about the harm from cellphones.

So while the World Health Organization and National Institute of Health say there isn't enough evidence to say cellphones absolutely cause harm to humans, what about the video where cellphones cook an egg or pop popcorn?  Check out this video that explains the truth:

My take on this is we really can't say.  It may be that prolonged use will cause tumors like cigarette smoking and by the time the evidence is proven, it will be too late for many.  But it might also be that this could be another Alar apple scare.  So what are we to do?  Why not just play it safe and use the speakerphone, bluetooth headset, text, or reduce how much time you are on your cellphone especially for children.  And oh by the way, it would also reduce your chances of being in a car accident.

 

 

 

Why Have eTextbooks Not Caught On?

I ran across an infographic from Online Schools that led me to articles hyping eTextbooks and then to some that say online textbooks are not catching on.  First, here's a couple of ads from eTextbook vendors that make the case: