The month of May is usually the high season of software vendors’ conferences, but mid-May 2010 was a bit extreme: I was invited to four major user conferences that took place on or about the same dates all over the United States (US). Given that cloning and teleporting technologies are decades away from us, I had to minimize the “damage” by at least picking two events that were relatively physically close to each other.
One event that I had to regretfully decline due to the scheduling conflict was Deltek Insight 2010. I certainly kept my eye on the event via the Twitter chatter and blogosphere (e.g., see a conference report from SPI Research’s principal Dave Hofferberth). More recently, I had an in-depth post-event recap briefing with Deltek’s in-the-know staff members and what follows now are the major developments that transpired at Deltek Insight 2010 (I attempted to put them in logical groups of announcements).Product Announcements (Solutions that are Already Released)
Budgeting & Planning for Deltek Costpoint and Deltek GCS Premier: The vendor released a new budgeting and planning solution that works directly with both the Deltek GCS Premier and Costpoint enterprise resource planning (ERP) products. These solutions enable government contractors to perform faster and more accurate budgeting and planning, allowing them to eliminate the “spreadsheet chaos” that often plagues organizations that have no formal planning and budgeting tools. There are two primary audiences for these products:
1. Finance personnel leverage Budgeting & Planning for visibility into project budgets and to roll up both project and divisional budgets into a complete operating plan. The solutions’ intuitive user interfaces (UI’s) make it easy for managers to constantly review projects and reconcile discrete organizational budgets to determine how they are tracking to the operating plan. Budgeting & Planning delivers the information that government contractors need to make the necessary business adjustments such as adding/reducing headcount, pursuing new business, or adjusting provisional rates.
2. Project managers utilize the Budgeting & Planning solutions to provide clearer visibility into actual project costs and how they are being allocated throughout a project’s lifecycle. The solutions track multiple cost types (including labor, material, and expenses) enabling project managers to do near real-time project cost tracking and perform variance analysis to determine whether a project is staying on budget. These solutions feature over 180 out-of-the-box (OOTB) reports that can be tailored to meet the specific needs of each project manager.
Deltek Mobile Time: Another new product for Deltek’s Government Contactors (GovCon) customers that was recently released was Deltek Mobile Time. This is a Blackberry application that works directly with Deltek Time Collection, and enables mobile professionals to view, record, update, submit, and approve labor activity from their smart phone. This ability should greatly increase the timeliness and accuracy of time collection processes.
Deltek Mobile Time makes time-card entries as easy as performing this activity from the home office. By ensuring more accurate and timely recording of labor activities, government contractors should achieve the following benefits:
* Tighten the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) compliance — because timesheets are more accurate and up to date
* Improve employee and manager productivity — because time entry activities are done in real-time from the road, rather than much later in the office
* Lower Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) – due to timely project billing
* Decrease payroll and billing costs — due to reduced time-card reprocessing
Deltek Vision Connect for Microsoft Outlook: For Deltek Vision customers, the company announced at Insight the upcoming release of Vision Connect for Microsoft Outlook. This product is now generally available (GA) in the marketplace, and leverages technology from the innovative vendor invisibleCRM. This new solution empowers business development professionals to manage their opportunities, appointments, emails, and contacts within Microsoft Outlook and automatically update Deltek Vision to ensure one system of record for sales and marketing activities.
In many organizations, business development professionals use the following two disconnected systems to manage marketing and sales activities with prospects and customers: Microsoft Outlook and their internal customer relationship management (CRM) system. Juggling two disparate systems can lead to data inaccuracies and inefficient work processes.
With Vision Connect for Microsoft Outlook, business development professionals will be able to manage their business appointments, emails and contacts, as well as manage clients, activities, and opportunities, all from Microsoft Outlook. By enabling personnel to manage the Deltek Vision records directly in Outlook, user adoption of Deltek Vision CRM could expand significantly within organizations that use both solutions. The solution offers numerous capabilities, including:
* Client, Vendor, and Opportunity Management to enter and update client, vendor and opportunity records within familiar Outlook forms.
* Contact Management to easily maintain Vision contact information within the native Outlook contact form. With this feature, there is no need for multiple contacts folders, as the solution manages personal and business contacts that are all shared and stored in Deltek Vision.
* Email Management to create and send emails in Microsoft Outlook that are captured within Deltek Vision. In addition, the solution creates permanent activity records and links email attachments to appropriate records within Deltek Vision to maintain one repository of all business development activities.
Product Previews (Solutions that were Demonstrated and Shown Fully for the First Time)
Deltek Costpoint 7: The vendor demonstrated its next-generation, fully web-architected version of Costpoint, which is slated for release within the next year or so. Deltek Costpoint 7 features an updated user experience (UX) design that was built with the help of “human factors” experts. The UX is designed to let users work in Costpoint the way they want to, and to reorganize and adapt the desktop to match the way users do their jobs.
Program Management Portal: I have only hinted at this integrated project control solution (code-named CAM Dashboard) in my previous blog series, but now I am at liberty to talk about the industry’s first application built for project managers, program managers, and Control Account Managers (CAM’s), and their need for unified information. Namely, all of these individuals manager complex programs and need a solution that integrates information on costs, schedules, and technical performance that will simplify a project manager’s efforts to keep programs on time and on budget.
For example, a company like the Boeing Company would have one CAM that is an expert on the landing gear, one on navigation systems, etc. Each CAM develops the scope, schedule, and budget for each component for which they are responsible in the context of the entire system that is being designed and built. They determine and authorize what will be built, how long it will take, and what it should cost.
With that in mind, Deltek is building a command center for project and program management teams that are leading major programs and managing their critical components. This ground-breaking solution provides one centralized location to status and monitor programs. Program Managers (PMs) and CAMs need access to scheduling, cost management/earned value management (EVM), risk management, and estimating tools, and for many years there was no single vendor that offered it all (i.e., each tool had to come from a separate vendor).
What lies at the heart of this new solution is customizable workflow and alerting engine. Program managers will be able to define the optimal business processes for handling things such as scope changes, project variances, and compliance procedures and be alerted to its progress. This opens a whole new dimension to how programs are managed and promotes not only process consistency but also process optimization.
Now, given the Enterprise Project Management (EPM) suite that Deltek has been delivering, CAMs and PMs should have all the software systems they need from one vendor. Since Deltek EPM covers most of the project management bases, the next step was to empower the PMs and CAMs with the information they need to understand project status at any time because all of the data that resides in the system.
Deltek is thus building this portal using Microsoft .NET Framework that will show EVM metrics (cost metrics, bulls-eye charts), schedule metrics, subcontractor performance reports, and even labor reports pulled from an ERP system, all in one place. This could be a huge innovation since managing all of this information to understand risk is where most programs break down.
Currently, I am not aware of any other vendor that could pull this all together because no one else owns the planning & scheduling, EVM, risk management and accounting systems on the back end. Deltek does that via the respective products such as Deltek Open Plan, Deltek Cobra/MPM, Deltek WelcomRisk, and Costpoint/GCS Premier.
Ultimately, the vendor’s goal with this integrated program management portal is to leverage all of these systems to give managers real-time status on all aspects of the component of the program that they are managing. Again, this offering could be a true game-changer in the industry, delivering an integrated solution and eliminating the multiple disconnected systems that are often used today. For the first time, project leaders could have complete traceability for all aspects of their projects in one place, greatly increasing their ability to keep critical programs on time and on budget.
Part 2 of this blog series will continue with my belated analysis and impressions from Deltek Insight 2010, especially in terms of some corporate announcements and new directions. In the meantime, your comments, opinions, etc. on Deltek’s approach and strategy are more than welcome.
technologyevaluation.com
Jumat, 21 Oktober 2011
9 Things to Look For in Lean Accounting Software for Manufacturers
I attended the Lean Accounting Summit in Orlando last September, and I’m still struck by the totally different attitudes of companies that choose lean transformation versus conventional non-lean companies. Lean thinking certainly isn’t new to the business community, but many managers and business influencers still have no clear understanding of lean. They typically pick and choose their lean manufacturing tools, and ignore other lean principles that contribute to success, if not playing an even more vital role. One example of such overlooked principles: lean accounting.
The problem is that lean transformation quickly collides with existing accounting practices—and the sooner a business realizes this, the better. Clearly, you cannot improve during your lean transformation journey without transforming your accounting (and your accounting software in particular).
Specific requirements for lean accounting software differ from regular financial and accounting systems. So what makes lean accounting software systems different? And what factors and functionality should businesses consider when selecting accounting packages for lean environments?
Based on the information I gathered during the summit, there are nine major functional requirements for a lean manufacturing business:
1. The software must be capable of handling accounting processes according to value streams. This includes value-stream mapping, and value-stream–based metrics, income statements, cost numbers, profitability, and capacity analysis. Since value streams for each company or subdivision are unique, the software should be flexible enough to accommodate all possible value-stream definitions and to make necessary changes down the road if required.
2. In addition to traditional costing methods, lean accounting software should be able to support alternative costing techniques, such as value-stream costing, kaizen costing, and target costing.
3. The software must support lean inventory valuation tools, including the possibility of switching to simple, visual, and even non-computerized inventory accounting tools.
4. Since lean manufacturing environments maintain and control significantly fewer transactions, lean accounting software should support adequate step-by-step transaction elimination without losing overall control of business processes. At the same time, it should still allow accountants to provide the financial reports required for compliance.
5. Analytical and reporting mechanisms that are flexible and easy to create, customize, and maintain must be included in the package. The ability to create and maintain non-standard (for conventional accounting) reports and custom-made visual summaries (such as box scores), or various types of performance measurement, is vital in a lean accounting environment.
6. The software must support lean-based planning tools and techniques, such as 18-month rolling sales, operations, and financial planning processes on a regular basis.
7. Continuous improvement, which is one of the core ideas of lean business, implies regular changes to business processes and procedures. Accounting software must be flexible enough to rapidly adapt to business changes on a regular basis.
8. Traditional financial and accounting reports are still required by governmental and fiscal authorities, which means that the ability to support lean and traditional reporting in parallel is another important function of lean accounting software. In this case, lean reporting plays a role for the managerial reporting structure that is independent of mandatory statements.
9. A simple graphical user interface that allows users to learn the system quickly and work effectively is an essential attribute of software designed for lean environments. This can be certainly applied to any software in general, but it is particularly important in the lean approach. In addition, the system’s architecture should allow easy modification of the interface, the system’s appearance and, sometimes, business processes.
Accounting should support lean transformation and not be an end in itself. The whole idea of light, fast, and adequate accounting that facilitates business development and provides all employees with access to financial and other results in a clear and visual way is the cornerstone of the ideal lean accounting software.
The problem is that lean transformation quickly collides with existing accounting practices—and the sooner a business realizes this, the better. Clearly, you cannot improve during your lean transformation journey without transforming your accounting (and your accounting software in particular).
Specific requirements for lean accounting software differ from regular financial and accounting systems. So what makes lean accounting software systems different? And what factors and functionality should businesses consider when selecting accounting packages for lean environments?
Based on the information I gathered during the summit, there are nine major functional requirements for a lean manufacturing business:
1. The software must be capable of handling accounting processes according to value streams. This includes value-stream mapping, and value-stream–based metrics, income statements, cost numbers, profitability, and capacity analysis. Since value streams for each company or subdivision are unique, the software should be flexible enough to accommodate all possible value-stream definitions and to make necessary changes down the road if required.
2. In addition to traditional costing methods, lean accounting software should be able to support alternative costing techniques, such as value-stream costing, kaizen costing, and target costing.
3. The software must support lean inventory valuation tools, including the possibility of switching to simple, visual, and even non-computerized inventory accounting tools.
4. Since lean manufacturing environments maintain and control significantly fewer transactions, lean accounting software should support adequate step-by-step transaction elimination without losing overall control of business processes. At the same time, it should still allow accountants to provide the financial reports required for compliance.
5. Analytical and reporting mechanisms that are flexible and easy to create, customize, and maintain must be included in the package. The ability to create and maintain non-standard (for conventional accounting) reports and custom-made visual summaries (such as box scores), or various types of performance measurement, is vital in a lean accounting environment.
6. The software must support lean-based planning tools and techniques, such as 18-month rolling sales, operations, and financial planning processes on a regular basis.
7. Continuous improvement, which is one of the core ideas of lean business, implies regular changes to business processes and procedures. Accounting software must be flexible enough to rapidly adapt to business changes on a regular basis.
8. Traditional financial and accounting reports are still required by governmental and fiscal authorities, which means that the ability to support lean and traditional reporting in parallel is another important function of lean accounting software. In this case, lean reporting plays a role for the managerial reporting structure that is independent of mandatory statements.
9. A simple graphical user interface that allows users to learn the system quickly and work effectively is an essential attribute of software designed for lean environments. This can be certainly applied to any software in general, but it is particularly important in the lean approach. In addition, the system’s architecture should allow easy modification of the interface, the system’s appearance and, sometimes, business processes.
Accounting should support lean transformation and not be an end in itself. The whole idea of light, fast, and adequate accounting that facilitates business development and provides all employees with access to financial and other results in a clear and visual way is the cornerstone of the ideal lean accounting software.
Selasa, 18 Oktober 2011
To Be Eliminated or Not, That is The Question
Career training is aimed at finding a job, writing the perfect resume, and the interview process is in much demand these days. There’s definitely a need.
It is no doubt more difficult today to get in the employment door–harder than in a very long time. Not much has changed though–except the unemployment pool is larger, more experienced, better educated–and better trained.
When the company has a job opening, it’s a problem for HR, but it is a different problem for the applicants. How HR handles its problem does make a difference to those who apply. So, now you are trained to get in the door and say all the right things. I’ve never seen this training before: elimination training, but someone must do this at an HR conference. I’m not talking about potty training but eliminating candidates to make the selection process less cumbersome. Even if some good potential employees eliminated there are plenty more equally good ones waiting for an opportunity that made the short list. It’s a reality especially for those looking for a job in the current economy. The career trainer gets you in the door so you can make a respectable impression; however, the rest is up to the employer.
I heard that some people felt that they were being unfairly viewed by others if they were lacking in either education or experience–especially when applying for a job–so I wrote an article, A Look at the Education vs Experience Debate. Here, I’m going to lay out some thoughts on the subject without talking so much about training but rather a perspective of how training, education and experience operate in the job search–including the process of narrowing the candidate pool. Narrowing the field and finding the right candidate is a daunting process for HR and the hiring folks, however, for applicants, it is neither as logical nor as transparent as maybe it should be.
Mostly what we remember about the job search is apply, apply, apply.
Joe is already with the company; he's to be interviewed, too.
And, we think the interview is the good part where we woo them, where we convince them how much experience we have for the job, where we tell them things not on our resume that should clinch it for us. Little do we know it is more a time for the employer to measure of how we fit in with their perception of the company image, and about how they glean from this first meeting with us.
Now comes the elimination part. Someone–in fact, a great many “someones” have to be eliminated. Joe is already with the company; he’s to be interviewed, too. They asked Bob and Brenda from a competitor company; the interviewers know them by reputation. They were asked to come to the interview without having to actually apply, but in order to be fair a job order has to go out to the public. The experience doesn’t seem any more fair, does it?
Our resume and cover letter (head shot) got us in the door.
If you’ve followed any of my blogs you will find various references to theatre. Why? Because it mirrors life in so many ways, but it sometimes can make what’s right in front of us make more sense.
Think about this: an actor goes to an audition after being told in his source that the director is looking for an actor, 40-50 years of age, medium build, to play a father. He must provide a headshot and resume beforehand and he will be called if he is deemed suitable for an audition.
The director is weighing the same factors against his or her vision for the play. (Let’s say her for simplicity sake.) All the actors she has selected from the headshots and resumes are qualified, but the audition and interview will give her more information. Those who did not submit a headshot, but submitted a resume she eliminated (except for Tom who she knows personally), and the same goes for those without a resume; they received no call.
At the audition, she asks everyone to do a monologue that they have prepared. Those without a prepared monologue are eliminated. She didn’t tell them before, but she wants experienced actors who know what’s expected in an audition. One actor speaks up and says, I don’t have one prepared but I can read one here on the spot if you. “Okay,” she says reluctantly, knowing she may eliminate him, too. However, when he has finished, she’s not sure she wants to eliminate him now.
...the job applicant needs what's specified to get in the door.
Audition over. It is between Tom and the one who improvised. So, despite her requirements for the part, she has chosen the leaders for reasons not a part of the qualifications she herself developed.
The process is exactly the same.
With addition the head shots, there’s another variable but actor are used to it. For them, it is not about the physical attractiveness but a stereotypical look, which other situations would be insulting. It’s a part of acting. Just as the actors needed the headshot and resume to get in the door, the regular job applicant needs what the employer has specified to get in the door. It’s unfortunate, but sometimes you need both the education certificate and the experience just to get in door. The elimination of candidates has already begun. You need both to get the call unless they know you.
Granted, it’s frustrating seeing others without your work experience, walk in and take the same job you may even have to train them for. On the other side of the issue, even being trained specifically for the job is no guarantee you’ll get in the door–because getting a job is not all about qualifications. Are you shocked?
The posted qualifications narrow the field of applicants, and not as much as you think.
Everyone has their reasons for who they pick, and it’s not always about qualifications. In fact, more jobs are to be found by networking and through someone else than applying to a posted entry. Today, we can’t afford to wait for all our networking to amount to something; however, we do have more networking options than ever. We can’t assume that it is either the education or experience qualification that disqualified us from the job; it could be anything. Maybe they just didn’t like us; there was no chemistry. It’s all about fitting in. We all want to fit in, but we don’t always. Personally I’d rather have that job where I fit in and the hiring folks agree.
In some cases, to just to go beyond a certain level in your job you have to have a degree. I have a super smart sister who made straight “A”s and could have named her ticket to any major university. She chose instead to work. She enjoyed her work, but she become stuck at one level and watched several people, not nearly as smart or as good at their job progress when she couldn’t because she didn’t have a degree. At the time she began working, the degree didn’t seem important. For some people, advanced education just doesn’t fit in the plans for a variety of reasons, including financial.
HR does put a value on education.
Still you don't fit the mold exactly...
An education is more than specific training for a job or it wouldn’t be called education. But education is general and has to be applied. What it does show is the ability of someone to start something and see it through to the end. Certification is a little different since it is more a validation of specific knowledge to a specific end, and does tend to be short term compared to education.
We don’t realize, especially when it affects us personally, just how many people out there are looking for work. Some are very qualified either in experience or education. Want someone younger, you go with education. Want maturity find the experienced person. With both–you win. At least sometimes. However, it is never that obvious.
It’s not a perfect system.
I have degrees that by themselves are rather worthless, but combine them with practical experience and use the knowledge (not in a book way) but in a way that makes sense, and you suddenly seem very qualified. Still you don’t fit the mold exactly–especially if the requirement is specific. Not an architect, an engineer, an MBA. The degree doesn’t match the job.
Image and attitude plays a part, like it or not.
Another example, colleges and universities love PhDs and would rather have one over a Masters degree–even if the Masters degree had tons of teaching and research experience. Colleges and universities are competing for credibility and the more PhDs, the more respect. Logical. Not at all. Well, to them. Choosing kids who can play a sport to play a game makes sense. Choosing friends who can’t play so well doesn’t make sense to anyone but those in on the reason. It’s all a matter of perspective.
The years of experience we earn can help, but they can also hurt. The number automatically tells someone how old we are and there are other clues to that as well. While they aren’t supposed to discriminate at all (and this would be age discrimination), it is all about getting the employee they want–not necessarily the best qualified. You don’t have to be a different race to be discriminated against. It’s just elimination now. How about not getting it because you didn’t go to a particular school or because you were a blond, or short, or fat. Or not handsome or pretty. Image plays a part, like it or not. And when people need to eliminate people from the pool, anything is game unofficially.
It is no doubt more difficult today to get in the employment door–harder than in a very long time. Not much has changed though–except the unemployment pool is larger, more experienced, better educated–and better trained.
When the company has a job opening, it’s a problem for HR, but it is a different problem for the applicants. How HR handles its problem does make a difference to those who apply. So, now you are trained to get in the door and say all the right things. I’ve never seen this training before: elimination training, but someone must do this at an HR conference. I’m not talking about potty training but eliminating candidates to make the selection process less cumbersome. Even if some good potential employees eliminated there are plenty more equally good ones waiting for an opportunity that made the short list. It’s a reality especially for those looking for a job in the current economy. The career trainer gets you in the door so you can make a respectable impression; however, the rest is up to the employer.
I heard that some people felt that they were being unfairly viewed by others if they were lacking in either education or experience–especially when applying for a job–so I wrote an article, A Look at the Education vs Experience Debate. Here, I’m going to lay out some thoughts on the subject without talking so much about training but rather a perspective of how training, education and experience operate in the job search–including the process of narrowing the candidate pool. Narrowing the field and finding the right candidate is a daunting process for HR and the hiring folks, however, for applicants, it is neither as logical nor as transparent as maybe it should be.
Mostly what we remember about the job search is apply, apply, apply.
Joe is already with the company; he's to be interviewed, too.
And, we think the interview is the good part where we woo them, where we convince them how much experience we have for the job, where we tell them things not on our resume that should clinch it for us. Little do we know it is more a time for the employer to measure of how we fit in with their perception of the company image, and about how they glean from this first meeting with us.
Now comes the elimination part. Someone–in fact, a great many “someones” have to be eliminated. Joe is already with the company; he’s to be interviewed, too. They asked Bob and Brenda from a competitor company; the interviewers know them by reputation. They were asked to come to the interview without having to actually apply, but in order to be fair a job order has to go out to the public. The experience doesn’t seem any more fair, does it?
Our resume and cover letter (head shot) got us in the door.
If you’ve followed any of my blogs you will find various references to theatre. Why? Because it mirrors life in so many ways, but it sometimes can make what’s right in front of us make more sense.
Think about this: an actor goes to an audition after being told in his source that the director is looking for an actor, 40-50 years of age, medium build, to play a father. He must provide a headshot and resume beforehand and he will be called if he is deemed suitable for an audition.
The director is weighing the same factors against his or her vision for the play. (Let’s say her for simplicity sake.) All the actors she has selected from the headshots and resumes are qualified, but the audition and interview will give her more information. Those who did not submit a headshot, but submitted a resume she eliminated (except for Tom who she knows personally), and the same goes for those without a resume; they received no call.
At the audition, she asks everyone to do a monologue that they have prepared. Those without a prepared monologue are eliminated. She didn’t tell them before, but she wants experienced actors who know what’s expected in an audition. One actor speaks up and says, I don’t have one prepared but I can read one here on the spot if you. “Okay,” she says reluctantly, knowing she may eliminate him, too. However, when he has finished, she’s not sure she wants to eliminate him now.
...the job applicant needs what's specified to get in the door.
Audition over. It is between Tom and the one who improvised. So, despite her requirements for the part, she has chosen the leaders for reasons not a part of the qualifications she herself developed.
The process is exactly the same.
With addition the head shots, there’s another variable but actor are used to it. For them, it is not about the physical attractiveness but a stereotypical look, which other situations would be insulting. It’s a part of acting. Just as the actors needed the headshot and resume to get in the door, the regular job applicant needs what the employer has specified to get in the door. It’s unfortunate, but sometimes you need both the education certificate and the experience just to get in door. The elimination of candidates has already begun. You need both to get the call unless they know you.
Granted, it’s frustrating seeing others without your work experience, walk in and take the same job you may even have to train them for. On the other side of the issue, even being trained specifically for the job is no guarantee you’ll get in the door–because getting a job is not all about qualifications. Are you shocked?
The posted qualifications narrow the field of applicants, and not as much as you think.
Everyone has their reasons for who they pick, and it’s not always about qualifications. In fact, more jobs are to be found by networking and through someone else than applying to a posted entry. Today, we can’t afford to wait for all our networking to amount to something; however, we do have more networking options than ever. We can’t assume that it is either the education or experience qualification that disqualified us from the job; it could be anything. Maybe they just didn’t like us; there was no chemistry. It’s all about fitting in. We all want to fit in, but we don’t always. Personally I’d rather have that job where I fit in and the hiring folks agree.
In some cases, to just to go beyond a certain level in your job you have to have a degree. I have a super smart sister who made straight “A”s and could have named her ticket to any major university. She chose instead to work. She enjoyed her work, but she become stuck at one level and watched several people, not nearly as smart or as good at their job progress when she couldn’t because she didn’t have a degree. At the time she began working, the degree didn’t seem important. For some people, advanced education just doesn’t fit in the plans for a variety of reasons, including financial.
HR does put a value on education.
Still you don't fit the mold exactly...
An education is more than specific training for a job or it wouldn’t be called education. But education is general and has to be applied. What it does show is the ability of someone to start something and see it through to the end. Certification is a little different since it is more a validation of specific knowledge to a specific end, and does tend to be short term compared to education.
We don’t realize, especially when it affects us personally, just how many people out there are looking for work. Some are very qualified either in experience or education. Want someone younger, you go with education. Want maturity find the experienced person. With both–you win. At least sometimes. However, it is never that obvious.
It’s not a perfect system.
I have degrees that by themselves are rather worthless, but combine them with practical experience and use the knowledge (not in a book way) but in a way that makes sense, and you suddenly seem very qualified. Still you don’t fit the mold exactly–especially if the requirement is specific. Not an architect, an engineer, an MBA. The degree doesn’t match the job.
Image and attitude plays a part, like it or not.
Another example, colleges and universities love PhDs and would rather have one over a Masters degree–even if the Masters degree had tons of teaching and research experience. Colleges and universities are competing for credibility and the more PhDs, the more respect. Logical. Not at all. Well, to them. Choosing kids who can play a sport to play a game makes sense. Choosing friends who can’t play so well doesn’t make sense to anyone but those in on the reason. It’s all a matter of perspective.
The years of experience we earn can help, but they can also hurt. The number automatically tells someone how old we are and there are other clues to that as well. While they aren’t supposed to discriminate at all (and this would be age discrimination), it is all about getting the employee they want–not necessarily the best qualified. You don’t have to be a different race to be discriminated against. It’s just elimination now. How about not getting it because you didn’t go to a particular school or because you were a blond, or short, or fat. Or not handsome or pretty. Image plays a part, like it or not. And when people need to eliminate people from the pool, anything is game unofficially.
Training Stereotypes for Success
We all seem to have answers for success, but they aren’t the same. Are there stereotypes of success? It’s not just about training stereotypes for success: that is people who look and act like us and have the same education and training. It’s a start, but there’s more.
As trainers, it is important for us to think about what it is our companies want to gain from our trainees. Maybe we should be training the keys of success. What does make someone a success in a company? It varies, but some things remain the same. How do we gauge success? If we understood that, then maybe the hiring process gets a little easier, productivity better, personnel issues better understood. Is it simple communication?Basic communication should, of course, make the cut of being able to communicate what needs to be said and understood by another party. It makes sense in this country that most people can understand one another pretty well; however, we do have our issues. Because we have a large number of Spanish-speaking people does that mean our company has to accommodate them. In Quebec, acceptance its bi-lingual nature is the law; that is not the case here in America–not yet. So, a non-English speaker can expect for that to be a handicap, initially; however, there are environments, even in the U.S. where that is a plus, not a negative.
Probably the first thing the Cave Man did was try to understand the language of other tribes after spending a good deal of time trying to kill all those who were different. Eventually, he came to realize if he wanted to learn from these strange people, he had to understand them and language was the best way. We do it today–or at least we try to make ourselves understood, realizing many may not understand our language.
"If you feel like you're the smartest guy in a room, that's probably because someone is fleecing you."
For example, we say on the phone click one number for English and another for Spanish. A least we will speak the language–sort of. But in other situations if we use big words or slang the other person doesn’t understand, have we accomplished communication. Have we offended either party with this conversation that is marginally understood?
I’m going to look at communication, language, education and training success based on our use of language, and in my own Cave Man basic way try to make some sense of it.
Now, let’s assume we speak the same language. Does that always mean we are successful? I saw an interesting article, the Best Kept Secrets of Successful Business People, but found many of its ideas fit anyone who seeks success. Xianhang Zhang says, “If you feel like you’re the smartest guy in a room, that’s probably because someone is fleecing you.” Too often students listen to others and feel the way to success is to get the diploma, but it’s always more than that. We know the diploma may get you in the door; it may even get you hired, but it will not guarantee you success.
Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.
And, this happens to trainees, too. “I’ve got the education or training now so promote me.” How many times have we heard the term “proven success?” It seems sometimes workers don’t hear it. That means a track record of accomplishments. Training and education is one thing–accomplishments another. Success is not a simple matter.
With education and training, it is important to apply it. It is almost a no brainer to most of us who sit in observation. You can be booksmart, but not have the character to use it. With common sense you go into the education or training with the idea of what’s in it for me? What can I do with this information? Every piece of learning can be connected to a practical issue. If you aren’t connecting it to something you can do with it, you are connecting it to something you have done with it in the past. The result either way is a practical connection.
Want to know why most people don’t get the jobs they apply for? I has nothing to do with race or other obvious or often thought of stereotypical attributes. It’s because they look good on paper, but in person they lack something very important–a confidence and knowledge of application. A company doesn’t want to know if you have the knowledge but can you apply it; HR wants to know if you have the knowledge to separate you from those who admit they don’t. The company wants to know if you’ll be able to use what you know to their benefit. At this point, they really don’t care about you. Later that may change after you have proven yourself.
Will you will fit into a company that has people who know what you know and know how to apply the knowledge you know as well..
So being the smartest guy in the room doesn’t make you the most marketable. Now the company has hired the “smartest guy” in the room, they want to know, not only are you capable of applying that knowledge, but if you will fit into a company that has people who know what you do and apply. Surprise! You may not be the smartest guy in the room right now after all.
According to businessman, Frank E. Rider:
“Work Hard
Be Smart
Be Lucky
“By “Work Hard” I don’t mean lift heavy boxes or work 80 hours a week. Do the things that are hard, the things you don’t understand or don’t want to do. Do the hard things.
“By ‘Be Smart’ I don’t mean be Einstein. The first rule of being smart is “don’t be dumb.” Think things through, be street smart, get at least one good nugget from every person you come in contact with. Behind every successful businessman/woman there are several thousand people (mentors, advisors, peers, competitors, employees, customers, vendors etc.) The human wiki.
“Don’t leave out luck. It’s a state of mind. Working hard and being smart will put you in position to take advantage of luck when it presents itself.”
So what distinguishes you? Character. Leadership. The ability to get along with others. The ability to leave your ego at home. Attitude is key to fitting in. Being the stereotype.
If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that "street" language is appropriate. I don't know many like that.
Fitting in. It doesn’t mean changing yourself until you are unnoticeable. Are you so shallow that if you can’t speak the way you always do, that means your less than yourself. We like people who speak other languages. Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.
If we do something more individual in nature like use “street talk” or “slang,” we may be cool but we don’t speak for the company. If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that language is appropriate. I don’t know many like that. At least not ones that pay well or are legal. You see these companies don’t care, and the products are in so much demand by an unsophisticated public.
Ax yo’self whad it means. Insulted that I should assume you speak that way. Insulted I should assume anything about you. That is exactly the point. We shouldn’t have any reason to assume anything about you. At first, language used in such a way my be charming; its certainly individual, but it will lose the respect of those you serve. Company speak, notice I did not call it standard English, is not as interesting.
It is assumed by people of color (to use their own term of acceptance here) that someone is a hiring person is prejudiced by race or color. Experience tells them you have certain attitudes and speak to customers in a certain way if the interview does not bring out the opposite. If you are well spoken in company speak, that fact will be ignored by most. I will admit a few prejudiced souls are still out there, but try dressing like the company and acting like the company and you most likely will fit in.
If you do not get the job, look at your other qualifications, education, work history, availability, and general attractiveness. The last is actually one of the more significant, unspoken rules of business. Image of company is everything. Short people beware except in a petite shop. Tall, good-looking people rule; product knowledge and procedures can be taught, while genetics are what they are. We have laws that prevent overt prejudice, but older people don’t apply to a younger company that sells to a young clientele either and vice versa. Certain businesses seek young female sales persons because the clietele is largely female. Seen very many males work at Victoria’s Secret, and some seek men to talk to businesses who have predominately male customers, i.e. John Deer.
There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus.
Often the world deals in stereotypes. Being a stereotype also means you fit in to an expected norm. So much so, take one look at theatre or film and you’ll see it full of stereotypes so much so it’s news when someone breaks that barrier. Take Denzel Washington. Like many African American actors, he could have allowed himself to be stereotyped and indeed he was until he first rose to prominence when he joined the cast of the medical drama St. Elsewhere, playing Dr. Philip Chandler for six years. That made a wider range of people take notice; however, early one he had to accept that stereotype and change it–for himself anyway. Later we see him the hero. He is well spoken and when he puts on the hood vernacular we are somewhat surprised. Success is based on changing up that stereotype.
All things being equal in theatre, an actor can lose a part to another who is more stereotypically the part, all talent being equal. It’s the same in the real world. Stereotypes stay what they are if you let them. There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus. Some actors love stereotypes–that is, if it gets them a lot of work. Take the actors who have dark features: they can play, Native Americans, Spanish, South or Central American, North African, Arab or Muslim, and sometimes Eastern European or even Indian or Pakisistani. I’m a blond, which has limited me to particular parts, California, Irish, German, Danish, etc., however, if I tried to convince others I could play ethnic roles I would be disappointed. There are two many who already fit that stereotype so why waste time with me. In Hollywood, in the past, those same characters would have been played by a caucasian actor of note, i.e., a very bad John Wayne as Ghengis Khan, and, we scoffed. But Hollywood was made to take the ethnic because the audience (and the union) demanded it, but the experience was better all around. These actors accepted the fact that they were a stereotype in one way, but still had to fit into the company. Speaking only one way would have limited them severely.
Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends.
Perseverance is what has made these character actors successful. Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends. They fit themselves into the trends. This is idea is not new. Ever hear of the man of a thousand faces? There is actually an old movie about Lon Chaney, a horror film star you may have hear about. The film starred James Cagney, another actor, who certainly didn’t fill the stereotype of tall, good-looking, but he played this role of an actor who wanted to work so bad that he disguised himself into whatever the film company was looking for, and got the part, proving that anything is possible if you try to fit in. Lon Chaney became the “man of a thousand faces” setting the standards for the movie industry to use people who were good actors to play parts they may not fit physically and use make-up, costumes and special effects to create the whole effect. Attitude, perseverence, using the ego to motivate or persevere, but do not wait for success, make it happen is the way to do.
By the way, there are may theories on success, read them, contemplate them, apply them if they fit. Don’t try to be the first to apply your own theory, you may not even get the job. You’ll have a lot of people during it their way; do you really think they want you working against them. Fit in with them and use your way if it brings you success, but only then. Use it before, unless you work for yourself, and you won’t fit in. We like being individuals, but the world is made of people who live together, and they can’t help putting stereotypes to their world. If you want to be like them, you have to a stereotype with a difference but still one they appreciate.
As trainers, it is important for us to think about what it is our companies want to gain from our trainees. Maybe we should be training the keys of success. What does make someone a success in a company? It varies, but some things remain the same. How do we gauge success? If we understood that, then maybe the hiring process gets a little easier, productivity better, personnel issues better understood. Is it simple communication?Basic communication should, of course, make the cut of being able to communicate what needs to be said and understood by another party. It makes sense in this country that most people can understand one another pretty well; however, we do have our issues. Because we have a large number of Spanish-speaking people does that mean our company has to accommodate them. In Quebec, acceptance its bi-lingual nature is the law; that is not the case here in America–not yet. So, a non-English speaker can expect for that to be a handicap, initially; however, there are environments, even in the U.S. where that is a plus, not a negative.
Probably the first thing the Cave Man did was try to understand the language of other tribes after spending a good deal of time trying to kill all those who were different. Eventually, he came to realize if he wanted to learn from these strange people, he had to understand them and language was the best way. We do it today–or at least we try to make ourselves understood, realizing many may not understand our language.
"If you feel like you're the smartest guy in a room, that's probably because someone is fleecing you."
For example, we say on the phone click one number for English and another for Spanish. A least we will speak the language–sort of. But in other situations if we use big words or slang the other person doesn’t understand, have we accomplished communication. Have we offended either party with this conversation that is marginally understood?
I’m going to look at communication, language, education and training success based on our use of language, and in my own Cave Man basic way try to make some sense of it.
Now, let’s assume we speak the same language. Does that always mean we are successful? I saw an interesting article, the Best Kept Secrets of Successful Business People, but found many of its ideas fit anyone who seeks success. Xianhang Zhang says, “If you feel like you’re the smartest guy in a room, that’s probably because someone is fleecing you.” Too often students listen to others and feel the way to success is to get the diploma, but it’s always more than that. We know the diploma may get you in the door; it may even get you hired, but it will not guarantee you success.
Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.
And, this happens to trainees, too. “I’ve got the education or training now so promote me.” How many times have we heard the term “proven success?” It seems sometimes workers don’t hear it. That means a track record of accomplishments. Training and education is one thing–accomplishments another. Success is not a simple matter.
With education and training, it is important to apply it. It is almost a no brainer to most of us who sit in observation. You can be booksmart, but not have the character to use it. With common sense you go into the education or training with the idea of what’s in it for me? What can I do with this information? Every piece of learning can be connected to a practical issue. If you aren’t connecting it to something you can do with it, you are connecting it to something you have done with it in the past. The result either way is a practical connection.
Want to know why most people don’t get the jobs they apply for? I has nothing to do with race or other obvious or often thought of stereotypical attributes. It’s because they look good on paper, but in person they lack something very important–a confidence and knowledge of application. A company doesn’t want to know if you have the knowledge but can you apply it; HR wants to know if you have the knowledge to separate you from those who admit they don’t. The company wants to know if you’ll be able to use what you know to their benefit. At this point, they really don’t care about you. Later that may change after you have proven yourself.
Will you will fit into a company that has people who know what you know and know how to apply the knowledge you know as well..
So being the smartest guy in the room doesn’t make you the most marketable. Now the company has hired the “smartest guy” in the room, they want to know, not only are you capable of applying that knowledge, but if you will fit into a company that has people who know what you do and apply. Surprise! You may not be the smartest guy in the room right now after all.
According to businessman, Frank E. Rider:
“Work Hard
Be Smart
Be Lucky
“By “Work Hard” I don’t mean lift heavy boxes or work 80 hours a week. Do the things that are hard, the things you don’t understand or don’t want to do. Do the hard things.
“By ‘Be Smart’ I don’t mean be Einstein. The first rule of being smart is “don’t be dumb.” Think things through, be street smart, get at least one good nugget from every person you come in contact with. Behind every successful businessman/woman there are several thousand people (mentors, advisors, peers, competitors, employees, customers, vendors etc.) The human wiki.
“Don’t leave out luck. It’s a state of mind. Working hard and being smart will put you in position to take advantage of luck when it presents itself.”
So what distinguishes you? Character. Leadership. The ability to get along with others. The ability to leave your ego at home. Attitude is key to fitting in. Being the stereotype.
If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that "street" language is appropriate. I don't know many like that.
Fitting in. It doesn’t mean changing yourself until you are unnoticeable. Are you so shallow that if you can’t speak the way you always do, that means your less than yourself. We like people who speak other languages. Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.
If we do something more individual in nature like use “street talk” or “slang,” we may be cool but we don’t speak for the company. If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that language is appropriate. I don’t know many like that. At least not ones that pay well or are legal. You see these companies don’t care, and the products are in so much demand by an unsophisticated public.
Ax yo’self whad it means. Insulted that I should assume you speak that way. Insulted I should assume anything about you. That is exactly the point. We shouldn’t have any reason to assume anything about you. At first, language used in such a way my be charming; its certainly individual, but it will lose the respect of those you serve. Company speak, notice I did not call it standard English, is not as interesting.
It is assumed by people of color (to use their own term of acceptance here) that someone is a hiring person is prejudiced by race or color. Experience tells them you have certain attitudes and speak to customers in a certain way if the interview does not bring out the opposite. If you are well spoken in company speak, that fact will be ignored by most. I will admit a few prejudiced souls are still out there, but try dressing like the company and acting like the company and you most likely will fit in.
If you do not get the job, look at your other qualifications, education, work history, availability, and general attractiveness. The last is actually one of the more significant, unspoken rules of business. Image of company is everything. Short people beware except in a petite shop. Tall, good-looking people rule; product knowledge and procedures can be taught, while genetics are what they are. We have laws that prevent overt prejudice, but older people don’t apply to a younger company that sells to a young clientele either and vice versa. Certain businesses seek young female sales persons because the clietele is largely female. Seen very many males work at Victoria’s Secret, and some seek men to talk to businesses who have predominately male customers, i.e. John Deer.
There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus.
Often the world deals in stereotypes. Being a stereotype also means you fit in to an expected norm. So much so, take one look at theatre or film and you’ll see it full of stereotypes so much so it’s news when someone breaks that barrier. Take Denzel Washington. Like many African American actors, he could have allowed himself to be stereotyped and indeed he was until he first rose to prominence when he joined the cast of the medical drama St. Elsewhere, playing Dr. Philip Chandler for six years. That made a wider range of people take notice; however, early one he had to accept that stereotype and change it–for himself anyway. Later we see him the hero. He is well spoken and when he puts on the hood vernacular we are somewhat surprised. Success is based on changing up that stereotype.
All things being equal in theatre, an actor can lose a part to another who is more stereotypically the part, all talent being equal. It’s the same in the real world. Stereotypes stay what they are if you let them. There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus. Some actors love stereotypes–that is, if it gets them a lot of work. Take the actors who have dark features: they can play, Native Americans, Spanish, South or Central American, North African, Arab or Muslim, and sometimes Eastern European or even Indian or Pakisistani. I’m a blond, which has limited me to particular parts, California, Irish, German, Danish, etc., however, if I tried to convince others I could play ethnic roles I would be disappointed. There are two many who already fit that stereotype so why waste time with me. In Hollywood, in the past, those same characters would have been played by a caucasian actor of note, i.e., a very bad John Wayne as Ghengis Khan, and, we scoffed. But Hollywood was made to take the ethnic because the audience (and the union) demanded it, but the experience was better all around. These actors accepted the fact that they were a stereotype in one way, but still had to fit into the company. Speaking only one way would have limited them severely.
Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends.
Perseverance is what has made these character actors successful. Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends. They fit themselves into the trends. This is idea is not new. Ever hear of the man of a thousand faces? There is actually an old movie about Lon Chaney, a horror film star you may have hear about. The film starred James Cagney, another actor, who certainly didn’t fill the stereotype of tall, good-looking, but he played this role of an actor who wanted to work so bad that he disguised himself into whatever the film company was looking for, and got the part, proving that anything is possible if you try to fit in. Lon Chaney became the “man of a thousand faces” setting the standards for the movie industry to use people who were good actors to play parts they may not fit physically and use make-up, costumes and special effects to create the whole effect. Attitude, perseverence, using the ego to motivate or persevere, but do not wait for success, make it happen is the way to do.
By the way, there are may theories on success, read them, contemplate them, apply them if they fit. Don’t try to be the first to apply your own theory, you may not even get the job. You’ll have a lot of people during it their way; do you really think they want you working against them. Fit in with them and use your way if it brings you success, but only then. Use it before, unless you work for yourself, and you won’t fit in. We like being individuals, but the world is made of people who live together, and they can’t help putting stereotypes to their world. If you want to be like them, you have to a stereotype with a difference but still one they appreciate.
Rabu, 12 Oktober 2011
Google’s Definition of Relevance in PPC? Clicks
Relevance in search means a lot of things to a lot of people. Information retrieval scientists right down to the average user of a search engine might think there is quite a lot to determining what is “relevant” to any given user on any given query. There is. Although by no means scientific, SEOmoz’s annual review of what experts think are factors determining search ranking
So when organic search principles seemed to be seeping into paid search programs, many observers read a lot more into the terminology than really should be read, it seems.
Remembering back to the launch of AdWords Select in 2002, Google explicitly defined the AdRank formula as your Max Bid on a keyword multiplied by CTR. They referred to this as rewarding more relevant ads. Indeed, at times they displayed a green bar denoting “user interest.” What was relevance, or “user interest”? It was synonymous with “clicks.” More clicks, higher ad rank.
Enter Quality Score, circa 2005, and several updates of it since. A whole industry has arisen trying to deciphering it.
Some Google documentation refers to “relevance,” “the quality of the landing page,” “other relevance factors,” and so on. But for years, key architects and managers of the AdWords product have quietly counseled people not to go overboard in interpreting these definitions.
Nick Fox, one of the leading pioneers in the AdWords program, used to remind us that the various other “relevance factors” were mostly “different cuts at” either predicting or reflecting the same measure of relevance… that being clicks, or CTR.
At SMX East last week, in our session on AdWords best practices, Fred Vallaeys flatly stated that by so-called “relevance,” Google basically means clicks.
It might sound really cool to try to divine how Google assesses information and scent, and user satisfaction all the purchase cycle, from ad impression, to click, to landing page, to further activity on site. It might be neat to guess at the semantics and other technology involved in “other relevance factors.” But in terms of the overall weighting in the vast majority of cases, as Vallaeys implied, these things might as well not exist. Google counts clicks. They may count them relative to the situation, normalize them for match type, etc. etc., but that’s what we mean by “relevance” here.
Another thing Vallaeys said (agreed on by many of us over the years) is that you shouldn’t be slavishly pursuing this click goal at all costs. You pick the ad, the segment, the bid, the match type, etc., that ultimately returns the best ROI for you. So in other words, Google rewards x, and you should be generally mindful of it, but ultimately pursue y.
“So why, then, do we devote so much time in these sessions to Quality Score, when so many other things are so much more important?,” asked an attendee.
“Because people want us to,” replied a panelist.
The truth about how to outperform the competition in the AdWords auction is not simple. But it’s also true that the “Quality Score industry” benefits from overcomplicating things and in many cases, misleading people about how Quality Score works. Also, like too many SEO’s, Quality Score pundits offer too much speculation about components of the formula, instead of sticking to what is known to be true.
Displayed Quality Score, like toolbar PageRank, has a seemingly endless capacity to bamboozle. It’s time to give it a rest, at least in the general marketing industry dialogue.
Knowing the ins and outs of the formula helps me quite a bit in my job, but I don’t think these lengthy dissections of it in public forums are as helpful as many speakers hope. I vow to pare back my treatment of QS in the future, and to focus on the most helpful tips and heuristic uses.
So when organic search principles seemed to be seeping into paid search programs, many observers read a lot more into the terminology than really should be read, it seems.
Remembering back to the launch of AdWords Select in 2002, Google explicitly defined the AdRank formula as your Max Bid on a keyword multiplied by CTR. They referred to this as rewarding more relevant ads. Indeed, at times they displayed a green bar denoting “user interest.” What was relevance, or “user interest”? It was synonymous with “clicks.” More clicks, higher ad rank.
Enter Quality Score, circa 2005, and several updates of it since. A whole industry has arisen trying to deciphering it.
Some Google documentation refers to “relevance,” “the quality of the landing page,” “other relevance factors,” and so on. But for years, key architects and managers of the AdWords product have quietly counseled people not to go overboard in interpreting these definitions.
Nick Fox, one of the leading pioneers in the AdWords program, used to remind us that the various other “relevance factors” were mostly “different cuts at” either predicting or reflecting the same measure of relevance… that being clicks, or CTR.
At SMX East last week, in our session on AdWords best practices, Fred Vallaeys flatly stated that by so-called “relevance,” Google basically means clicks.
It might sound really cool to try to divine how Google assesses information and scent, and user satisfaction all the purchase cycle, from ad impression, to click, to landing page, to further activity on site. It might be neat to guess at the semantics and other technology involved in “other relevance factors.” But in terms of the overall weighting in the vast majority of cases, as Vallaeys implied, these things might as well not exist. Google counts clicks. They may count them relative to the situation, normalize them for match type, etc. etc., but that’s what we mean by “relevance” here.
Another thing Vallaeys said (agreed on by many of us over the years) is that you shouldn’t be slavishly pursuing this click goal at all costs. You pick the ad, the segment, the bid, the match type, etc., that ultimately returns the best ROI for you. So in other words, Google rewards x, and you should be generally mindful of it, but ultimately pursue y.
“So why, then, do we devote so much time in these sessions to Quality Score, when so many other things are so much more important?,” asked an attendee.
“Because people want us to,” replied a panelist.
The truth about how to outperform the competition in the AdWords auction is not simple. But it’s also true that the “Quality Score industry” benefits from overcomplicating things and in many cases, misleading people about how Quality Score works. Also, like too many SEO’s, Quality Score pundits offer too much speculation about components of the formula, instead of sticking to what is known to be true.
Displayed Quality Score, like toolbar PageRank, has a seemingly endless capacity to bamboozle. It’s time to give it a rest, at least in the general marketing industry dialogue.
Knowing the ins and outs of the formula helps me quite a bit in my job, but I don’t think these lengthy dissections of it in public forums are as helpful as many speakers hope. I vow to pare back my treatment of QS in the future, and to focus on the most helpful tips and heuristic uses.
Filtering ‘bad’ traffic: get beyond good and evil
In some parts of the world, lengthy conversations are still being held on the subject of persuading clients to devote enough budget to digital. In light of past battles nearly won, it’s particularly maddening that some paid search campaign managers seem so bent on handcuffing their own accounts, that they are limiting their upside through a process of excessive filtering.
To be clear, it’s important to use a means of excluding unwanted traffic – such as keyword exclusions (negative keywords). But it’s also important that overall campaign strategy be driven by a game plan rather than fear or “best practices” hearsay. You’re in advertising, not corporate security. If you feel like your whole job is to keep “bad” clicks away from the website, chances are you’re over-filtering.
Some clients – indeed, more than half – will be timid and will go about trying new things in accounts slowly. And that’s fine.
A select few clients will be gunslingers, aggressive marketers who actually love to try new things.
But never, ever should the agency or expert over-filter on behalf of the client without being absolutely certain that the client is as conservative as one might assume. In platforms like AdWords, we’ve been handed wonderful tools to get very granular in excluding certain keyword phrases and display network sources (and other segments) that are almost certainly bad bets to convert for the target market. From this simple principle inevitably grew overkill. Instead of focusing on the business reasons for filtering, some marketers focused on to-do lists (to look busy); exotic strategies (to look “advanced”); and scare tactics (to win business or to sell a new tool). And instead of seeing Google’s machine-learning capabilities in keyword match typing and display network placement (expanded broad match in search and automatic matching in the display network) as broadly positive developments with some negative elements that require hand-tweaking, some marketers have chosen to outright reject them and see only negative aspects.
And so the negative keyword lists and publisher exclusions lists grew. And grew and grew and grew. And sometimes they were misapplied to the whole campaign when applying them at the ad group level would have sufficed.
Sure! Powerful machine learning by the world’s largest technology company, using the world’s largest dataset, is 100 percent worthless! You should filter as much as you can by hand, and when that fails, get other computers involved to counteract Google’s computers, willy-nilly. You should make your account into one big filter.
Hmm.
As I see it, there are three main drawbacks to this over-filtering bias:
1. You limit volume potential and total profit overall.
2. Because you artificially create a narrower universe, but forget just how narrow you made it (and why), when it comes time to look for creative ways to expand that finite volume (like when the client asks for more, more, more), the “out of the box” means of boosting volume you come up with turn out to be worse than some good potential traffic that was right under your nose. (Specifically, “so-so” phrases that you’ve so hastily negatived out, or “so-so” publishers that you’ve excluded, might have served some purpose to the business – moreso than grasping at straws for unproven keywords or new, exotic channels.)
3. What I like to call the “short leash problem.” When you try to anticipate and react to every possible poor-performing segment (and sub-sub-sub-segment), your analysis is actually getting too granular, and your assumptions, too causal. Mathematically, if you slice and dice everything enough, something will be coming in last place – often for no good reason. The upside of using a broader approach is that you keep your options open for random good luck. This approach may lead to more learning, and in the end, more volume and total profit.
There may even be deep-seated reasons we get addicted to the short leash. Economists explain the behavior as “myopic loss aversion,” and it can affect investment returns.
Think of it this way. One day, you lost a mitten. When you’re five years old, that’s bound to happen. But for some reason, the adult brain sees this loss as a significant moral failing and a potential threat to the family’s future financial viability. You’d hear about it over and over again, with constant warnings to “never” lose a mitten again (thinking in terms of absolutes), or worse, be fitted with “idiot strings” to ensure the security of your personal hand-warming equipment (shaming). You’d think that after years of training, and in an adult scenario that involves a mandate for profit maximization, it wouldn’t be hard to drop the baggage. But it is! Too easily, “should” and “ought” creep into our decision-making in ways that aren’t synonymous with “the predicted return on investment.”
If you’ve ever tried to advise Google that it’s going about something in the “wrong” way, or asked it to define exactly what a valid or invalid click is, you know that Google and its computers don’t think in terms of good and evil. Catchy slogans (“don’t be evil”) are basically red herrings; they are not, in any shape or form, Google policy.
One way of looking at the Google world of data-driven success is to say that “Google is like a baby’s brain” (terms used by one Googler attempting to explain the company’s apparent managerial chaos). Systems are built to absorb and learn at a breathtaking pace, just by “taking it all in” and letting the “brain” do what it does best – compute, iterate, and develop more complexity in responses than could be possible through a deliberate effort to “plan.” In fact, the “baby’s brain” analogy is a compliment to Google, at least in moral terms. A baby is much more judgmental and discerning than a machine-learning system. As inhuman as it may sound, machine learning works at its breathtaking best when it’s free of moral baggage.
Take a concrete example. Why prejudge a certain publisher in the display network because it’s a “certain type of site”? Just let the machines run and cut off the non-performers at a predetermined point. It could be that you get 200 clicks on a “silly” travel site for the same price as you pay for 30 clicks on the “serious” one, so the two turn out to be equally good buys.
Similarly, you should avoid excluding keyword phrases that “might not be exactly” what is being searched for. What if they aid in research stage awareness, or convert occasionally? Exclude away if the data look pitiful. But please don’t leap into a priori negativing-out of phrases including things like “recipes,” “cheap,” “directions,” “software,” etc. just because these are slightly off your desired micro-intent. Try keeping them hanging around a little longer to see if they convert occasionally. Or try different ad groups, landing pages, and creative for different types of intent.
In some cases, you’ll make some amazing discoveries. We’ve discovered that searchers interested in high-volume orders actually use a variety of different signifiers, and they’re all seeking slightly different things (most of them being some form of bulk order). But at first glance, some of the words (“wholesale,” let’s say) appear to convert poorly. Until you solve the puzzle, the tight-leash, exclude-whole-hog mentality appears sound, but it doesn’t correspond well with the broader potential inherent in the search behavior.
To be sure, you’ll still want to use your human judgment to see patterns and to adjust slightly to taste. Just don’t overdo it. And try using rounds of lower bidding (signifying something that is worth less to you) rather than exclusions (signifying that the source is literally worthless to you).
To be clear, it’s important to use a means of excluding unwanted traffic – such as keyword exclusions (negative keywords). But it’s also important that overall campaign strategy be driven by a game plan rather than fear or “best practices” hearsay. You’re in advertising, not corporate security. If you feel like your whole job is to keep “bad” clicks away from the website, chances are you’re over-filtering.
Some clients – indeed, more than half – will be timid and will go about trying new things in accounts slowly. And that’s fine.
A select few clients will be gunslingers, aggressive marketers who actually love to try new things.
But never, ever should the agency or expert over-filter on behalf of the client without being absolutely certain that the client is as conservative as one might assume. In platforms like AdWords, we’ve been handed wonderful tools to get very granular in excluding certain keyword phrases and display network sources (and other segments) that are almost certainly bad bets to convert for the target market. From this simple principle inevitably grew overkill. Instead of focusing on the business reasons for filtering, some marketers focused on to-do lists (to look busy); exotic strategies (to look “advanced”); and scare tactics (to win business or to sell a new tool). And instead of seeing Google’s machine-learning capabilities in keyword match typing and display network placement (expanded broad match in search and automatic matching in the display network) as broadly positive developments with some negative elements that require hand-tweaking, some marketers have chosen to outright reject them and see only negative aspects.
And so the negative keyword lists and publisher exclusions lists grew. And grew and grew and grew. And sometimes they were misapplied to the whole campaign when applying them at the ad group level would have sufficed.
Sure! Powerful machine learning by the world’s largest technology company, using the world’s largest dataset, is 100 percent worthless! You should filter as much as you can by hand, and when that fails, get other computers involved to counteract Google’s computers, willy-nilly. You should make your account into one big filter.
Hmm.
As I see it, there are three main drawbacks to this over-filtering bias:
1. You limit volume potential and total profit overall.
2. Because you artificially create a narrower universe, but forget just how narrow you made it (and why), when it comes time to look for creative ways to expand that finite volume (like when the client asks for more, more, more), the “out of the box” means of boosting volume you come up with turn out to be worse than some good potential traffic that was right under your nose. (Specifically, “so-so” phrases that you’ve so hastily negatived out, or “so-so” publishers that you’ve excluded, might have served some purpose to the business – moreso than grasping at straws for unproven keywords or new, exotic channels.)
3. What I like to call the “short leash problem.” When you try to anticipate and react to every possible poor-performing segment (and sub-sub-sub-segment), your analysis is actually getting too granular, and your assumptions, too causal. Mathematically, if you slice and dice everything enough, something will be coming in last place – often for no good reason. The upside of using a broader approach is that you keep your options open for random good luck. This approach may lead to more learning, and in the end, more volume and total profit.
There may even be deep-seated reasons we get addicted to the short leash. Economists explain the behavior as “myopic loss aversion,” and it can affect investment returns.
Think of it this way. One day, you lost a mitten. When you’re five years old, that’s bound to happen. But for some reason, the adult brain sees this loss as a significant moral failing and a potential threat to the family’s future financial viability. You’d hear about it over and over again, with constant warnings to “never” lose a mitten again (thinking in terms of absolutes), or worse, be fitted with “idiot strings” to ensure the security of your personal hand-warming equipment (shaming). You’d think that after years of training, and in an adult scenario that involves a mandate for profit maximization, it wouldn’t be hard to drop the baggage. But it is! Too easily, “should” and “ought” creep into our decision-making in ways that aren’t synonymous with “the predicted return on investment.”
If you’ve ever tried to advise Google that it’s going about something in the “wrong” way, or asked it to define exactly what a valid or invalid click is, you know that Google and its computers don’t think in terms of good and evil. Catchy slogans (“don’t be evil”) are basically red herrings; they are not, in any shape or form, Google policy.
One way of looking at the Google world of data-driven success is to say that “Google is like a baby’s brain” (terms used by one Googler attempting to explain the company’s apparent managerial chaos). Systems are built to absorb and learn at a breathtaking pace, just by “taking it all in” and letting the “brain” do what it does best – compute, iterate, and develop more complexity in responses than could be possible through a deliberate effort to “plan.” In fact, the “baby’s brain” analogy is a compliment to Google, at least in moral terms. A baby is much more judgmental and discerning than a machine-learning system. As inhuman as it may sound, machine learning works at its breathtaking best when it’s free of moral baggage.
Take a concrete example. Why prejudge a certain publisher in the display network because it’s a “certain type of site”? Just let the machines run and cut off the non-performers at a predetermined point. It could be that you get 200 clicks on a “silly” travel site for the same price as you pay for 30 clicks on the “serious” one, so the two turn out to be equally good buys.
Similarly, you should avoid excluding keyword phrases that “might not be exactly” what is being searched for. What if they aid in research stage awareness, or convert occasionally? Exclude away if the data look pitiful. But please don’t leap into a priori negativing-out of phrases including things like “recipes,” “cheap,” “directions,” “software,” etc. just because these are slightly off your desired micro-intent. Try keeping them hanging around a little longer to see if they convert occasionally. Or try different ad groups, landing pages, and creative for different types of intent.
In some cases, you’ll make some amazing discoveries. We’ve discovered that searchers interested in high-volume orders actually use a variety of different signifiers, and they’re all seeking slightly different things (most of them being some form of bulk order). But at first glance, some of the words (“wholesale,” let’s say) appear to convert poorly. Until you solve the puzzle, the tight-leash, exclude-whole-hog mentality appears sound, but it doesn’t correspond well with the broader potential inherent in the search behavior.
To be sure, you’ll still want to use your human judgment to see patterns and to adjust slightly to taste. Just don’t overdo it. And try using rounds of lower bidding (signifying something that is worth less to you) rather than exclusions (signifying that the source is literally worthless to you).
Google Tweaks its “Other” Black Box: Ads Quality Update Deepens Measures of Relevance
Word is out that Google has gone through another round of algorithmic tweaks to address content quality in the organic search results. These updates have collectively become known by the nickname Project Panda.
Not to be outdone, the Ads Quality team at Google has been pondering adjustments to the Quality Score formula with pilot projects in smaller markets like Portugal. As a result of these tests, Google is announcing today that landing page quality, or the “relevance” component of Quality Score, will be weighted more heavily than previously. The rollout is now going global.
Explains Jonathan Alferness, a Director of Product Management at Google: “What we’ve found is that the ads at the top of the page typically get more clicks and are rightly rewarded for strong relevance. But some of the ads further down the page might have particularly good ‘post-click’ experiences and deserve a boost.”In the past, landing page quality was usually administered as if it were “policy”: that is, there was an attempt to look for what Alferness calls “negative signals”. An advertiser that violated “policy” would find its ads suspended, for all intents and purposes. Some would even have their accounts deleted. More recently, perhaps to set things on the road for the current wave of testing that will incorporate a broader-based assessment of landing page relevance into the ranking formula, Google began making a distinction between landing page quality and landing page policy. That being said, for the most part, Google will be assessing advertisers “on the same basic principles as in the past,” says Alferness.
That sounds fair enough. But if it’s essentially the same, why announce a change?
Because — although the initial effect may be small — it’s clear that some advertisers may be rewarded, and others, punished, for sending users to “correct,” “relevant,” or “expected” landing pages. (Quotation marks don’t imply that Google or Alferness used these terms.)
Alferness advises that advertisers “build a page for the aggregate set of users that is natural or appropriate to what they are looking for.”
Traffick’s take? Above all, it’s impossible to comment authoritatively on changing formulas whose details are never fully revealed. Just days ago, we reminded you that Google’s primary definition of “relevance” was clicks. It still is, with a little wiggle room thrown in referring to broader concepts of relevance. It’s worth asking: would Google prefer to cultivate an image of a user-experience-obsessed company because that’s nobler-sounding than a company that just maximizes effective CPM rates? Probably it would. But is it true? Isn’t Google mostly just treating clicks as synonymous with relevance, just as it did in 2002? When Fred Vallaeys said as much just weeks ago, wasn’t he basically correct?
No matter. As we’ve seen, anyone with a tool to sell, an ax to grind, or a surfeit of smoke to blow up a client’s butt is going to latch onto this new official incorporation of scent into the mix and begin weaving beautiful fantasies out of it. Of that we’re sure. That despite Alferness’ advice to focus landing page testing primarily on the “user experience” (and, we’d add, engagement and business metrics), rather than trying to “reverse engineer the algorithm.”
Let’s cut to the chase, if there is any left to cut to. What might be some real-world examples of winners and losers (even if most changes will be slight) under the updated algorithm?
* Appropriate levels of granularity will be a winner. Companies who have languished too long with bloated ad groups, too few landing pages, sending too much traffic to the home page, etc., may suffer slightly.
* Google is going to be looking at keywords more so than navigational elements, according to my interpretation of some of Alferness’ comments. That means conventional architecture, clear copy, and “SEO style” incorporation of relevant keywords in page elements can only help. If some aspect of your page, form, cart, etc. is highly deficient, it might begin hurting your Quality Score. But for most navigational and layout elements, it’s safe to say for now that Google won’t be micromanaging the user experience as if there’s one best way. And that’s a relief.
Companies that have been doing things this way in the first place were doing so for good reason: better user satisfaction and better information scent are almost always tied to better campaign ROI. Companies should not have needed any external motivation to address relevancy and information scent issues, but Google, clearly, is now providing an extra incentive to do just that.
For smart, user-sensitive advertisers, the change will likely be noticed only as a positive.
Meanwhile, for lazy, disorganized, or clueless users of the AdWords platform, well, the Google AdWords Tourist Tax probably just went up.
Google won’t comment on whether such changes are revenue-neutral for the company, but given their ability to test and calibrate the auction, it’s a safe bet they aren’t setting themselves up for a significant loss. But this is more of a long-term loyalty play than a short or medium term revenue play. And it isn’t just user loyalty that is involved, but advertiser appreciation. By forcing the issue on practices that may spur higher aggregate conversion rates, Google will be able to remind and convince advertisers of the value of the platform for years to come.
Not to be outdone, the Ads Quality team at Google has been pondering adjustments to the Quality Score formula with pilot projects in smaller markets like Portugal. As a result of these tests, Google is announcing today that landing page quality, or the “relevance” component of Quality Score, will be weighted more heavily than previously. The rollout is now going global.
Explains Jonathan Alferness, a Director of Product Management at Google: “What we’ve found is that the ads at the top of the page typically get more clicks and are rightly rewarded for strong relevance. But some of the ads further down the page might have particularly good ‘post-click’ experiences and deserve a boost.”In the past, landing page quality was usually administered as if it were “policy”: that is, there was an attempt to look for what Alferness calls “negative signals”. An advertiser that violated “policy” would find its ads suspended, for all intents and purposes. Some would even have their accounts deleted. More recently, perhaps to set things on the road for the current wave of testing that will incorporate a broader-based assessment of landing page relevance into the ranking formula, Google began making a distinction between landing page quality and landing page policy. That being said, for the most part, Google will be assessing advertisers “on the same basic principles as in the past,” says Alferness.
That sounds fair enough. But if it’s essentially the same, why announce a change?
Because — although the initial effect may be small — it’s clear that some advertisers may be rewarded, and others, punished, for sending users to “correct,” “relevant,” or “expected” landing pages. (Quotation marks don’t imply that Google or Alferness used these terms.)
Alferness advises that advertisers “build a page for the aggregate set of users that is natural or appropriate to what they are looking for.”
Traffick’s take? Above all, it’s impossible to comment authoritatively on changing formulas whose details are never fully revealed. Just days ago, we reminded you that Google’s primary definition of “relevance” was clicks. It still is, with a little wiggle room thrown in referring to broader concepts of relevance. It’s worth asking: would Google prefer to cultivate an image of a user-experience-obsessed company because that’s nobler-sounding than a company that just maximizes effective CPM rates? Probably it would. But is it true? Isn’t Google mostly just treating clicks as synonymous with relevance, just as it did in 2002? When Fred Vallaeys said as much just weeks ago, wasn’t he basically correct?
No matter. As we’ve seen, anyone with a tool to sell, an ax to grind, or a surfeit of smoke to blow up a client’s butt is going to latch onto this new official incorporation of scent into the mix and begin weaving beautiful fantasies out of it. Of that we’re sure. That despite Alferness’ advice to focus landing page testing primarily on the “user experience” (and, we’d add, engagement and business metrics), rather than trying to “reverse engineer the algorithm.”
Let’s cut to the chase, if there is any left to cut to. What might be some real-world examples of winners and losers (even if most changes will be slight) under the updated algorithm?
* Appropriate levels of granularity will be a winner. Companies who have languished too long with bloated ad groups, too few landing pages, sending too much traffic to the home page, etc., may suffer slightly.
* Google is going to be looking at keywords more so than navigational elements, according to my interpretation of some of Alferness’ comments. That means conventional architecture, clear copy, and “SEO style” incorporation of relevant keywords in page elements can only help. If some aspect of your page, form, cart, etc. is highly deficient, it might begin hurting your Quality Score. But for most navigational and layout elements, it’s safe to say for now that Google won’t be micromanaging the user experience as if there’s one best way. And that’s a relief.
Companies that have been doing things this way in the first place were doing so for good reason: better user satisfaction and better information scent are almost always tied to better campaign ROI. Companies should not have needed any external motivation to address relevancy and information scent issues, but Google, clearly, is now providing an extra incentive to do just that.
For smart, user-sensitive advertisers, the change will likely be noticed only as a positive.
Meanwhile, for lazy, disorganized, or clueless users of the AdWords platform, well, the Google AdWords Tourist Tax probably just went up.
Google won’t comment on whether such changes are revenue-neutral for the company, but given their ability to test and calibrate the auction, it’s a safe bet they aren’t setting themselves up for a significant loss. But this is more of a long-term loyalty play than a short or medium term revenue play. And it isn’t just user loyalty that is involved, but advertiser appreciation. By forcing the issue on practices that may spur higher aggregate conversion rates, Google will be able to remind and convince advertisers of the value of the platform for years to come.
Landing Page Relevance Criteria: Google’s Modus Vivendi
Following up on the news that Google is incorporating landing page relevance more directly into Quality Score as it affects position and thus CPC’s as well as eligibility in the keyword auction…
As a few of us try to digest Google’s high-level announcement, it’s still unclear what exactly Google is measuring now, or plans to measure in the future, when it comes to relevance and scent in the keyword, ad, and post-click user journey. Ruling out major policy violations, the discussion with product management director Jonathan Alferness seemed to break it down into two areas:
* Navigational experiences and usability
* Consistent relevance from a keyword or meaning standpoint
But there is a third factor, I think, as I attempted to imply in the idea of users coming to an “expected” landing page. We’ve ruled out “policy violations” as being even more serious than what is being measured for ranking purposes. But there is something similar, and that is basically:Non-policy-violating websites and pages that are in somewhat of a grey zone in that they don’t exactly take the user to the type of page they were expecting. For shorthand let’s call them ‘purposeful misdirection’. Again: extreme versions of ‘purposeful misdirection’ are violations that consumers require protection from. Those long strings of privacy-violating forms you need to fill out to get the $5 iPod that never materializes are so far over the line, Google suspends accounts, kicks ass, takes names, etc. But what to do about “lite” versions of this? Nothing has been violated, but something (‘purposeful misdirection’) is still a bit unfair to other advertisers.I expect Google has the technology and mechanical turk capacity to measure all three, and to incorporate them into Quality Scores. But I’d guess the third is particularly interesting.
There are a couple of reasons Google is likely interested in negating ‘purposeful misdirection’, aside from the obvious point that users don’t like it as it represents poor or inauthentic information scent.
* The first reason it’s particularly interesting is that it may be the least subjective of the three categories of user experience, so it’s an area we can all agree on. Relevance in meaning is subjective, depending on how you look at it. User experiences (clutter, Flash, interfaces, layout, speed) are important, but who decides what’s good or bad? But we should all be able to agree that if you promise x type of page, and you don’t get x type of page, that’s no good for users.
* The second reason it matters is because some advertisers will gently misdirect users so that they increase CTR’s, all else being equal, and CTR’s boost Quality Score. Since nearly Day 1, Google has been aware of this phenomenon, but to enforce it manually via policy specialists became infeasible. Arguably then, Google is still perfecting scalable ways of smoothing out anomalies in ranking. In sum, an ideal ranking system would not ban an advertiser for implying something (free, buy, read, download) that wasn’t quite true (might take a little more effort than implied, or the offer expired, etc.), but would apply just enough of a Quality Score penalty to offset the unfair boost in CTR that comes with luring users with blue-sky wordings. For that matter, this is essentially the principle that has been in place around rules against excessive punctuation, all caps, etc.
So have you been sliding by with gently excessive claims that don’t violate policy, but do shade the truth (free download, free shipping, implying you’ll get relevant content when all you get is a paywall), enjoying a CTR benefit and lower CPC’s as a result? Google’s new algorithm is probably looking to tighten that up a little, so you pay a bit more to do that.
If you’re on the other side of the fence, writing ads that filter aggressively (responsible B2B ads that use cues to ward off consumers; or ads that refer to ordering, buying, or complex actions you may need to take to receive a benefit or read premium content), you’ve been so honest that it actually hurt your CTR, Quality Score, and CPC’s (though it would have helped your conversion rate). As a thank-you to you, and a win for consumers, an “up front and honest” style ad may bubble up a bit higher in the rankings, or cost a few cents less to the advertiser.
These things may be difficult to measure, and to be sure, it would appear that human intervention on a wide scale might be needed to make it effective. But in fact, there are ways to simplify the process. Few if any could disagree with a methodology that essentially asks “true or not” when the ad refers to the type of landing page that is to be expected (eg. premium topical content on the landing page), and the user gets something else (eg. a paywall and no possibility of receiving said content without completing a transaction). The means to make it true might be a slight re-wording of the ad, offer, and landing page (free trial), which would make an “honest company” out of you, and an “honest search engine” out of Google.
No advertiser really loses under this (obviously, speculative, as is all the speculation in this post) scenario. If you’re particularly clever in softly misdirecting users to shake out some semi-desired action out of them, well at worst, your CPC’s creep up a bit. If you’ve been more honest in the past with some of your ad wordings, which dampened CTR’s and cost you some Quality Score love, you may have been doing yourself a favor anyway, in the form of improved conversion rates and reputation. Now, the theory goes, Google’s also going to thank you with a slight improvement in rank (or a discount of a few pennies per click).
If you’re an agency and you manage many accounts with ads at both ends of that spectrum, you might even have the opportunity to observe whether this comes to pass.
As a few of us try to digest Google’s high-level announcement, it’s still unclear what exactly Google is measuring now, or plans to measure in the future, when it comes to relevance and scent in the keyword, ad, and post-click user journey. Ruling out major policy violations, the discussion with product management director Jonathan Alferness seemed to break it down into two areas:
* Navigational experiences and usability
* Consistent relevance from a keyword or meaning standpoint
But there is a third factor, I think, as I attempted to imply in the idea of users coming to an “expected” landing page. We’ve ruled out “policy violations” as being even more serious than what is being measured for ranking purposes. But there is something similar, and that is basically:Non-policy-violating websites and pages that are in somewhat of a grey zone in that they don’t exactly take the user to the type of page they were expecting. For shorthand let’s call them ‘purposeful misdirection’. Again: extreme versions of ‘purposeful misdirection’ are violations that consumers require protection from. Those long strings of privacy-violating forms you need to fill out to get the $5 iPod that never materializes are so far over the line, Google suspends accounts, kicks ass, takes names, etc. But what to do about “lite” versions of this? Nothing has been violated, but something (‘purposeful misdirection’) is still a bit unfair to other advertisers.I expect Google has the technology and mechanical turk capacity to measure all three, and to incorporate them into Quality Scores. But I’d guess the third is particularly interesting.
There are a couple of reasons Google is likely interested in negating ‘purposeful misdirection’, aside from the obvious point that users don’t like it as it represents poor or inauthentic information scent.
* The first reason it’s particularly interesting is that it may be the least subjective of the three categories of user experience, so it’s an area we can all agree on. Relevance in meaning is subjective, depending on how you look at it. User experiences (clutter, Flash, interfaces, layout, speed) are important, but who decides what’s good or bad? But we should all be able to agree that if you promise x type of page, and you don’t get x type of page, that’s no good for users.
* The second reason it matters is because some advertisers will gently misdirect users so that they increase CTR’s, all else being equal, and CTR’s boost Quality Score. Since nearly Day 1, Google has been aware of this phenomenon, but to enforce it manually via policy specialists became infeasible. Arguably then, Google is still perfecting scalable ways of smoothing out anomalies in ranking. In sum, an ideal ranking system would not ban an advertiser for implying something (free, buy, read, download) that wasn’t quite true (might take a little more effort than implied, or the offer expired, etc.), but would apply just enough of a Quality Score penalty to offset the unfair boost in CTR that comes with luring users with blue-sky wordings. For that matter, this is essentially the principle that has been in place around rules against excessive punctuation, all caps, etc.
So have you been sliding by with gently excessive claims that don’t violate policy, but do shade the truth (free download, free shipping, implying you’ll get relevant content when all you get is a paywall), enjoying a CTR benefit and lower CPC’s as a result? Google’s new algorithm is probably looking to tighten that up a little, so you pay a bit more to do that.
If you’re on the other side of the fence, writing ads that filter aggressively (responsible B2B ads that use cues to ward off consumers; or ads that refer to ordering, buying, or complex actions you may need to take to receive a benefit or read premium content), you’ve been so honest that it actually hurt your CTR, Quality Score, and CPC’s (though it would have helped your conversion rate). As a thank-you to you, and a win for consumers, an “up front and honest” style ad may bubble up a bit higher in the rankings, or cost a few cents less to the advertiser.
These things may be difficult to measure, and to be sure, it would appear that human intervention on a wide scale might be needed to make it effective. But in fact, there are ways to simplify the process. Few if any could disagree with a methodology that essentially asks “true or not” when the ad refers to the type of landing page that is to be expected (eg. premium topical content on the landing page), and the user gets something else (eg. a paywall and no possibility of receiving said content without completing a transaction). The means to make it true might be a slight re-wording of the ad, offer, and landing page (free trial), which would make an “honest company” out of you, and an “honest search engine” out of Google.
No advertiser really loses under this (obviously, speculative, as is all the speculation in this post) scenario. If you’re particularly clever in softly misdirecting users to shake out some semi-desired action out of them, well at worst, your CPC’s creep up a bit. If you’ve been more honest in the past with some of your ad wordings, which dampened CTR’s and cost you some Quality Score love, you may have been doing yourself a favor anyway, in the form of improved conversion rates and reputation. Now, the theory goes, Google’s also going to thank you with a slight improvement in rank (or a discount of a few pennies per click).
If you’re an agency and you manage many accounts with ads at both ends of that spectrum, you might even have the opportunity to observe whether this comes to pass.
Senin, 21 Juni 2010
A small yet noteworthy change to our item stats link serving
FeedBurner has been busy analyzing, publicizing, optimizing and monetizing your feeds since 2004, and in that time, we've seen our fair share of feed traffic. In fact, we see billions of hits from feed traffic per week, and we watch this data carefully for trends and opportunities to improve what we do in making sure your feed content is delivered as quickly as possible, as accurately as possible, no matter what its destination might be.
Today we are making an improvement that we think will serve our publishers better by making our service more compatible with search engines that crawl feeds.
When we started the service, one thing we were not sure of at the time was how the feed reading ecosystem would treat the links we rewrite in order to give you statistics on how many people click on your feed items.
For instance, on the previous post in this blog, we change the link in the feed item for "FeedBurner Terms of Service Update" from
http://adsenseforfeeds.blogspot.com/2009/08/feedburner-terms-of-service-update.html
to
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/MQiv/~3/Z8Es5QuvgEI/feedburner-terms-of-service-update.html
which sends the browser to that original URL, but allows us to first track the click.
As a technical detail, we rewrote these links with a code of "302 Temporary Redirect" which tells the browser or consuming service that the redirect is not permanent, and thus it would need to be read every time.
As of today we are changing this to be a "301 Permanent Redirect" because we've looked at the traffic enough to tell that there some benefit to changing this to a "301 Permanent Redirect" - in that some search engines that index the feeds themselves will consider these to be additional links that should be used in determining the popularity of your site. This is the same way that "URL shortener" services send traffic and get treated by search engines, so we feel that this is consistent with the way that content is distributed today. This update should not change the number of clicks that come to your site from your feed nor should it significantly affect the number of clicks FeedBurner tracks for you.
What do you need to do? Nothin'. Nada. Just keep burning your feeds from FeedBurner or your AdSense account in AdSense for feeds, and we will keep working hard to ensure your content is as accessible as possible – now, hopefully even more so.
Today we are making an improvement that we think will serve our publishers better by making our service more compatible with search engines that crawl feeds.
When we started the service, one thing we were not sure of at the time was how the feed reading ecosystem would treat the links we rewrite in order to give you statistics on how many people click on your feed items.
For instance, on the previous post in this blog, we change the link in the feed item for "FeedBurner Terms of Service Update" from
http://adsenseforfeeds.blogspot.com/2009/08/feedburner-terms-of-service-update.html
to
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/MQiv/~3/Z8Es5QuvgEI/feedburner-terms-of-service-update.html
which sends the browser to that original URL, but allows us to first track the click.
As a technical detail, we rewrote these links with a code of "302 Temporary Redirect" which tells the browser or consuming service that the redirect is not permanent, and thus it would need to be read every time.
As of today we are changing this to be a "301 Permanent Redirect" because we've looked at the traffic enough to tell that there some benefit to changing this to a "301 Permanent Redirect" - in that some search engines that index the feeds themselves will consider these to be additional links that should be used in determining the popularity of your site. This is the same way that "URL shortener" services send traffic and get treated by search engines, so we feel that this is consistent with the way that content is distributed today. This update should not change the number of clicks that come to your site from your feed nor should it significantly affect the number of clicks FeedBurner tracks for you.
What do you need to do? Nothin'. Nada. Just keep burning your feeds from FeedBurner or your AdSense account in AdSense for feeds, and we will keep working hard to ensure your content is as accessible as possible – now, hopefully even more so.
Enabling social sharing with FeedFlare
Feed content is being constantly distributed via new channels and endpoints every day. More and more, these new channels involve sharing your content in social networks and applications such as Facebook, Twitter and Google Buzz.
Recently, we launched our Socialize service to help you as the publisher distribute your feed via social networks, with the first network being Twitter. If you use Blogger, you can already connect your feed to Buzz via the "connected sites" link in Buzz.
But it's equally important in the social world to make sure your subscribers can also share your feed content easily on these social networks. FeedFlare helps enable this by allowing you to configure links in your feed that promote sharing. You can do this by going to the Optimize tab FeedBurner and choosing FeedFlare, and then of course, adding some flare.
Now, we won't berate you for only doing the "bare minumum," nor do we recommend having "37 pieces of flare" in your feed - but we do think you should express yourself with at least a little flare that helps your subscribers move your content around these social networks a little easier.
To that end, just yesterday we enabled the official "Post to Google Buzz" FeedFlare in our catalog, which easily allows users to repost your content to Google Buzz, and then automatically updates the label with the number of times it was posted.
Recently, we launched our Socialize service to help you as the publisher distribute your feed via social networks, with the first network being Twitter. If you use Blogger, you can already connect your feed to Buzz via the "connected sites" link in Buzz.
But it's equally important in the social world to make sure your subscribers can also share your feed content easily on these social networks. FeedFlare helps enable this by allowing you to configure links in your feed that promote sharing. You can do this by going to the Optimize tab FeedBurner and choosing FeedFlare, and then of course, adding some flare.
Now, we won't berate you for only doing the "bare minumum," nor do we recommend having "37 pieces of flare" in your feed - but we do think you should express yourself with at least a little flare that helps your subscribers move your content around these social networks a little easier.
To that end, just yesterday we enabled the official "Post to Google Buzz" FeedFlare in our catalog, which easily allows users to repost your content to Google Buzz, and then automatically updates the label with the number of times it was posted.
Jumat, 08 Januari 2010
10 Reasons Why Google Will Fail in Future
Google, a giant in the field of software industry started with a search engine, and today they have extended their empire beyond a software engine. However, with an extensive desire to be in the lead of the ongoing technological race, Google can these days be found to be involved in arenas which can ultimately lead to its downfall. Some of the reasons why this may happen are as follows.
Reason 1: Google Chrome Open Source OS – Flexibility and Lack of Standard
Although Google claims its Chrome OS to be speedy, highly secured and web-centric, the latest beta version of the OS is1 nothing else than a Browser on Steroids. Although a lot of users are falling for the Open Source these days, Chrome OS doesn’t offer the full flexibility and a working environment for any user to work on. If it’s just the web browser that one can find in an OS, it isn’t worth a download.
When one shifts to a new OS, he/she expects better platform and better applications to play around. But with an OS that is just limited to a browser, it simply can’t help one from going back to the previous OS. Considering the Open Source OS, Linux is still better as it is less resource hungry and provides better flexibility and work environment for many tasks.
On the other hand, any Open Source product is sure to have many versions. Chrome cannot escape, and this kills the credibility of the OS for application developers. Thus Chrome OS’s Open Source Nature, which Google believes as strength might turn to become its main enemy in the long run. It has happened for Linux and Unix, it can very well happen to Chrome.
2Reason 2: GoogleMail Vulnerability The worldwide used Gmail has been long been in its stage of the Beta version, and the Google team yet seems to ignore the loophole associated with the Gmail.
The ignored part of the Gmail that allows hackers to send emails in the name of Google Team can be a serious threat to user’s privacy. One can easily attach a Trojan file in the mail and create havoc at receiver’s end.
Also, the Gmail vulnerability disables the Google Developers team to set up a quality process that helps its users to avoid spam mails in their Inbox.
Reason 3: Google’s Entry into Smartphone Market
Source: mobilephonereviews.org
Source: mobilephonereviews.org
Google has entered Smartphone market to fight Apple, and they have chosen to provide a common platform for the industry with Android OS. This was an awesome step from Google. But where Google fails is its active entry into SmartPhone Hardware with Nexus One. This not only makes it as Apple’s competitor but also competitor of Nokia, Samsung, Motorola and others. It is in a way becoming the enemy of its own partners.
Many industry observers feel that current priority for the Phone manufacturers is to beat Apple, and they will continue using Android even after Nexus One. This notion will soon go away if Nexus One beats iPhone. So Google will fail either way.
The other major risk for Google is draining huge resource for Open Source product like Android, which cannot bring good revenue for the company in future. Android might become like MySQL, Open Office or Linux. They can be big but their return is extremely low.
Reason 4: Lost Focus on Search — Google makes its user helpless
Although Google search engine is highly powerful compared to other search engines, the list of search results that is displayed after hitting the “Enter” can end up a novice user totally confused. Moreover the search results are based on page rank. And page rank may not be the appropriate way to define a site’s popularity and it’s not sure that the user finds his required data at the first site displayed in the list of search results.
Google has been focusing on many areas now and the biggest victim has been its main strength Search. Google has not innovated well in search for long time.
3
Google used Page Rank for ranking sites for long, and that developed SEO as an industry around Google. But the company is now trying to kill Page Rank after the SEO industry overplayed with it. It is killing Page Rank but what after Page Rank? Google has no answer.
Google tried bringing social effect to Google Search result where you can omit the results you don’t want to see and can increase rank of favorite sites. I am sure Google collected those data and tried using in overall search rankings. But it seems to be failed.
Now the search engine giant has come to Twitter for Real Time Search, but it has forgotten that it needs more innovation in search than using Twitter stream. If page rank can be played, Twitter stream can also be. Google does not seem to have alternatives, and it is busy working for Cloud, Android or Chrome.
Reason 5: Google doesn’t value Customer Support
Customers are the king of modern business. Any organization, today, needs to undoubtedly focus on strategies to keep its customer base happy. In that respect, customer support plays a vital role. However, in case of Google, the customer support seems to avoid this dimension of embracing its valuable visitors to its web page. Consider the Google Reader Support.
4
Notice the lines that say “we will not necessarily respond to your message”. This clearly reflects the Google’s attitude of avoiding its valuable users.
You just follow same steps for Yahoo. It asks you to give your phone number and they call you to solve the problems. Yahoo has one of the finest Customer Service, and I see this as one of their strength which might bring the company back to their lost glory once again.
Remember Korean and Japanese Automobile Companies Hyundai and Toyota captured good percentage of World Market with excellent after sales service. Now they are the brand of trust for middle class population across the globe.
Reason 6: Becoming Enemy of Marketers: Google AdSense are sometimes suddenly Halted
Google Adsense is one of the attractive features for any bloggers and webmasters. However it is sometimes annoying to see that your Google Ads are halted even though when you have followed Google AdSense Policies, and all your revenue via the Ads are lost. Although Google has its policies to block the ads, there are cases where the Ads are blocked for no particular reasons which ultimately disables the bloggers/site owners to receive the Dollars.
5
Google’s biggest inventions in monetization of internet traffic were its products, Adwords and Adsense. They became anonymous with the internet advertising and even today very few people look for alternatives for monetization of their web traffic or for running online ad campaigns.
Google has been harsh to its users in last one year and many people lost their Adsense accounts. The company says it has deactivated the users with less activity or users who violated the Adsense policies. This reminds me of Digg, who went on banning users for violating terms and established itself as marketers enemy. Every effort Digg made to ensure non-spam content in the site ended up making it a niche site. Facebook and Twitter took the charm from it.
Google might be the next victim of becoming too rude to its users.
Reason 7: Weak in Social Media and Increasing Attack from Facebook
When Google bought Orkut, it almost took over the World. It is still the biggest Social Network in Brazil, it has lost first spot in other priority markets like India, Pakistan and Iran. Facebook has already overtaken Orkut in India and the gap is increasing.
Orkut remained the same for long time while Facebook innovated in different ways like opening up its APIs for inbuilt
Source: watblog.com
Source: watblog.com
application developers, adding photo tagging, bringing micro-blogging type status messaging etc.
Google views Web Design with the spectacles of Engineering. But that’s not just the arena where Web Designing is limited to. Douglas Bowman, in one of his posts, says he quitted his position as Visual Web Design Lead in Google because of the limited miniscule vision that Google had of the Web Designing tools.
Even though Google is making strides in various avenues, this austerity drive of it to keep its products as simple as possible can eventually drag it to the drain.
Google has failed to make good design for Orkut, its look just sucks. Orkut has been adding Facebook features lately but it again seems to be without any vision and plan. Most changes are poorly made, poorly designed and are brought has wrong time.
Reason 8: Facebook Connect and Gateway to Internet
One day when I tried to logging in to Digg, it gave me facility to log in through Facebook. I was surprised as Facebook was a competitor of Digg. But soon I found many other sites doing the same. People wanted one log in to the online world, and Facebook thought of becoming one.
Source: blog.taragana.com
Source: blog.taragana.com
Google identified Orkut’s failure and saw Facebook becoming people’s entry to Web, it brought Google Connect. This was aimed at fighting Facebook Connect, which already has many good share of internet traffic flowing. Google Connect is coming up good, but it is nowhere close to Facebook Connect. Analysts believe that Google Connect is behind Twitter Connect too.
Reason 9: Less Awareness in China
China, the next Techno-Giant has its own search engine “Baidu”. China, which has the highest population of the world, lacks awareness of the Google Search Engine. If Google aims to be ahead in the race of search engine, it must seriously start working on making Google more attractive to the loyal Baidu Chinese users. Since China is a gigantic market due to its huge population, Google’s inability to tap on this could eventually back fire it.
Reason 10: Data Privacy
this in turn has made us dependent. We may not know but unconsciously we are sending whole lot of private and
Source: Online WSJ
Source: Online WSJ
personal data, to Google’s server, which is only anonymized after 9 months. This warehouse of data leaves the privacy of Google users at vulnerable state.
Moreover, it is not sure if Google really doesn’t peep into Gmail’s contents. Although it claims that to display ads in Gmail, it never uses humans, it is not sure if such contents are not used for other purposes. This controversial corridor seen in Gmail could eventually push it from its current position.
Google CEO Eric says they will abide by law in terms of Privacy, and makes his point clear that Google will do anything with users’ data if it is not illegal. This is frightening, and such attitude can easily make the most loved company, Google, to one of the most hated entity in the World.
Reason 1: Google Chrome Open Source OS – Flexibility and Lack of Standard
Although Google claims its Chrome OS to be speedy, highly secured and web-centric, the latest beta version of the OS is1 nothing else than a Browser on Steroids. Although a lot of users are falling for the Open Source these days, Chrome OS doesn’t offer the full flexibility and a working environment for any user to work on. If it’s just the web browser that one can find in an OS, it isn’t worth a download.
When one shifts to a new OS, he/she expects better platform and better applications to play around. But with an OS that is just limited to a browser, it simply can’t help one from going back to the previous OS. Considering the Open Source OS, Linux is still better as it is less resource hungry and provides better flexibility and work environment for many tasks.
On the other hand, any Open Source product is sure to have many versions. Chrome cannot escape, and this kills the credibility of the OS for application developers. Thus Chrome OS’s Open Source Nature, which Google believes as strength might turn to become its main enemy in the long run. It has happened for Linux and Unix, it can very well happen to Chrome.
2Reason 2: GoogleMail Vulnerability The worldwide used Gmail has been long been in its stage of the Beta version, and the Google team yet seems to ignore the loophole associated with the Gmail.
The ignored part of the Gmail that allows hackers to send emails in the name of Google Team can be a serious threat to user’s privacy. One can easily attach a Trojan file in the mail and create havoc at receiver’s end.
Also, the Gmail vulnerability disables the Google Developers team to set up a quality process that helps its users to avoid spam mails in their Inbox.
Reason 3: Google’s Entry into Smartphone Market
Source: mobilephonereviews.org
Source: mobilephonereviews.org
Google has entered Smartphone market to fight Apple, and they have chosen to provide a common platform for the industry with Android OS. This was an awesome step from Google. But where Google fails is its active entry into SmartPhone Hardware with Nexus One. This not only makes it as Apple’s competitor but also competitor of Nokia, Samsung, Motorola and others. It is in a way becoming the enemy of its own partners.
Many industry observers feel that current priority for the Phone manufacturers is to beat Apple, and they will continue using Android even after Nexus One. This notion will soon go away if Nexus One beats iPhone. So Google will fail either way.
The other major risk for Google is draining huge resource for Open Source product like Android, which cannot bring good revenue for the company in future. Android might become like MySQL, Open Office or Linux. They can be big but their return is extremely low.
Reason 4: Lost Focus on Search — Google makes its user helpless
Although Google search engine is highly powerful compared to other search engines, the list of search results that is displayed after hitting the “Enter” can end up a novice user totally confused. Moreover the search results are based on page rank. And page rank may not be the appropriate way to define a site’s popularity and it’s not sure that the user finds his required data at the first site displayed in the list of search results.
Google has been focusing on many areas now and the biggest victim has been its main strength Search. Google has not innovated well in search for long time.
3
Google used Page Rank for ranking sites for long, and that developed SEO as an industry around Google. But the company is now trying to kill Page Rank after the SEO industry overplayed with it. It is killing Page Rank but what after Page Rank? Google has no answer.
Google tried bringing social effect to Google Search result where you can omit the results you don’t want to see and can increase rank of favorite sites. I am sure Google collected those data and tried using in overall search rankings. But it seems to be failed.
Now the search engine giant has come to Twitter for Real Time Search, but it has forgotten that it needs more innovation in search than using Twitter stream. If page rank can be played, Twitter stream can also be. Google does not seem to have alternatives, and it is busy working for Cloud, Android or Chrome.
Reason 5: Google doesn’t value Customer Support
Customers are the king of modern business. Any organization, today, needs to undoubtedly focus on strategies to keep its customer base happy. In that respect, customer support plays a vital role. However, in case of Google, the customer support seems to avoid this dimension of embracing its valuable visitors to its web page. Consider the Google Reader Support.
4
Notice the lines that say “we will not necessarily respond to your message”. This clearly reflects the Google’s attitude of avoiding its valuable users.
You just follow same steps for Yahoo. It asks you to give your phone number and they call you to solve the problems. Yahoo has one of the finest Customer Service, and I see this as one of their strength which might bring the company back to their lost glory once again.
Remember Korean and Japanese Automobile Companies Hyundai and Toyota captured good percentage of World Market with excellent after sales service. Now they are the brand of trust for middle class population across the globe.
Reason 6: Becoming Enemy of Marketers: Google AdSense are sometimes suddenly Halted
Google Adsense is one of the attractive features for any bloggers and webmasters. However it is sometimes annoying to see that your Google Ads are halted even though when you have followed Google AdSense Policies, and all your revenue via the Ads are lost. Although Google has its policies to block the ads, there are cases where the Ads are blocked for no particular reasons which ultimately disables the bloggers/site owners to receive the Dollars.
5
Google’s biggest inventions in monetization of internet traffic were its products, Adwords and Adsense. They became anonymous with the internet advertising and even today very few people look for alternatives for monetization of their web traffic or for running online ad campaigns.
Google has been harsh to its users in last one year and many people lost their Adsense accounts. The company says it has deactivated the users with less activity or users who violated the Adsense policies. This reminds me of Digg, who went on banning users for violating terms and established itself as marketers enemy. Every effort Digg made to ensure non-spam content in the site ended up making it a niche site. Facebook and Twitter took the charm from it.
Google might be the next victim of becoming too rude to its users.
Reason 7: Weak in Social Media and Increasing Attack from Facebook
When Google bought Orkut, it almost took over the World. It is still the biggest Social Network in Brazil, it has lost first spot in other priority markets like India, Pakistan and Iran. Facebook has already overtaken Orkut in India and the gap is increasing.
Orkut remained the same for long time while Facebook innovated in different ways like opening up its APIs for inbuilt
Source: watblog.com
Source: watblog.com
application developers, adding photo tagging, bringing micro-blogging type status messaging etc.
Google views Web Design with the spectacles of Engineering. But that’s not just the arena where Web Designing is limited to. Douglas Bowman, in one of his posts, says he quitted his position as Visual Web Design Lead in Google because of the limited miniscule vision that Google had of the Web Designing tools.
Even though Google is making strides in various avenues, this austerity drive of it to keep its products as simple as possible can eventually drag it to the drain.
Google has failed to make good design for Orkut, its look just sucks. Orkut has been adding Facebook features lately but it again seems to be without any vision and plan. Most changes are poorly made, poorly designed and are brought has wrong time.
Reason 8: Facebook Connect and Gateway to Internet
One day when I tried to logging in to Digg, it gave me facility to log in through Facebook. I was surprised as Facebook was a competitor of Digg. But soon I found many other sites doing the same. People wanted one log in to the online world, and Facebook thought of becoming one.
Source: blog.taragana.com
Source: blog.taragana.com
Google identified Orkut’s failure and saw Facebook becoming people’s entry to Web, it brought Google Connect. This was aimed at fighting Facebook Connect, which already has many good share of internet traffic flowing. Google Connect is coming up good, but it is nowhere close to Facebook Connect. Analysts believe that Google Connect is behind Twitter Connect too.
Reason 9: Less Awareness in China
China, the next Techno-Giant has its own search engine “Baidu”. China, which has the highest population of the world, lacks awareness of the Google Search Engine. If Google aims to be ahead in the race of search engine, it must seriously start working on making Google more attractive to the loyal Baidu Chinese users. Since China is a gigantic market due to its huge population, Google’s inability to tap on this could eventually back fire it.
Reason 10: Data Privacy
this in turn has made us dependent. We may not know but unconsciously we are sending whole lot of private and
Source: Online WSJ
Source: Online WSJ
personal data, to Google’s server, which is only anonymized after 9 months. This warehouse of data leaves the privacy of Google users at vulnerable state.
Moreover, it is not sure if Google really doesn’t peep into Gmail’s contents. Although it claims that to display ads in Gmail, it never uses humans, it is not sure if such contents are not used for other purposes. This controversial corridor seen in Gmail could eventually push it from its current position.
Google CEO Eric says they will abide by law in terms of Privacy, and makes his point clear that Google will do anything with users’ data if it is not illegal. This is frightening, and such attitude can easily make the most loved company, Google, to one of the most hated entity in the World.
10 Technologies That Will Rock 2010
Looking back at 2009, we can say that it was the most interesting time in the web technology ( despite the harsh economy). The year 2009 boosted the potential of mobile gadgets and its value in today’s networked society. We can call it the rise of social awareness of networking and communicating.
So when we look ahead in 2010, we will see that the innovation has just begun. So here are the lists of technologies, which I think, will rock the year 2010. Most of the technologies that will be mentioned are related to online media and the Internet.
1. Apple’s Tablet
The noises and speculations are too high to ignore the presence of Apple’s Tablet. If all the rumors are authentic and, if by all means, Apple launches the iSlate on 25th January, then it’s going to be the thing to talk about in 2010.
We must admit that a tablet is a concept that has been around us for a very long time. But it is still not the consumer device that people would die for. But after the increase in sales and demands of Amazon Kindle and Nook, the market is pretty sure that a tablet is soon to be the device to have. So at this time, if Apple can bring the device with the interface that people are looking for then that’s it – We have our new iPOD. It is not a biased statement, but a truth in some way.
The reason that I say is because Online Reading is something that every Internet users do and Tablet provides the best way to consume the Internet content. Though we might still be working on a Laptop, Tablet will be the way to consume digital content.
2. NetPhone
We are already seeing the importance of Google Voice, which many Americans have enjoyed. We already have a software like Skype which allows you to communicate through the internet data line.
This demonstrates that people are still comfortable with voice communication and it is not going to die. We would still want to call our friends and families and communicate. Hence, we might see more advancement in VOIP technology.
Though mobile network providers would have to play a hard battle with the VOIP services, the conflict between these two models will end once we have more and more VOIP services running in our mobile devices.
3. Net Neutrality
The rise of Smartphone have suddenly put a lot of pressure on the mobile network providers. The online content consumption and communication have stressed out the network providers. One of the prominent example is the failure of At&T to meet the iPhone’s demand. This have forced the content providers and distributors into two opposite poles.
Content providers like Google (YouTube for video content) consumes a lot of bandwidth. This is not good for the network providers because they have to face the burden of handling the requests. On the other hand, content providers don’t have to pay anything to the distributors. As a result, Network providers would have to increased their fees. Now, this brings a great conflict between the consumers, the providers and the distributors.
Net neutrality is all about giving full access to the Internet without any restrictions. But we still need to see some agreement between the providers and the distributors. Hence, we might be able to see some breakthroughs on Net Neutrality in 2010 which would solve the current problems.
4. Social Profile Management(Advanced Analytics)
Online Social Networking sites have blasted the news channel on each opportunities in 2009 and it will continue to do so in 2010. More and more real time contents would be distributed online and consumed by people. Online networking will see more than just sharing information.
2009 had an overwhelming reaction towards social media which created a lot of junk in the Internet. Currently, informations and contents go to waste and don’t make their way toward the targeted audiences.
2010 will see a revolution towards social profile management with advance analytics. This will be applying spam control over your networks and strengthening the efficiency of your network connections. As sites like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook are used in professional hiring, Profile search will also be a big thing. Social network provides a best way to reach out to potential businesses. Hence search (not for content) but for people should be big. Social profile management with advance analytics will be the next big thing for social networks
5. Virtualization
Client desktop computing is surely the new way towards connecting people to offices. Virtual desktops or Virtual machines will soon be employed in many offices providing better flexibility to hardware and software selection.
This will reduce the hardware cost of servers and desktops and CPU maintenance in office. This will also reduce the cost of softwares as most will be deployed in the virtual machines. This is a key to cutting costs, lowering complexity, as well as increasing agility as needs shift.
6. Online TV
YouTube and other online video sharing sites have almost killed Television. The new generations prefer Internet over TV channels. As with the music industry, TV channels have understood that going online is the only way towards future and they have to jump into this bandwagon before it’s too late.
There are already many commercial channels shifting their attention from TV to Youtube or other sites like Hulu. Further, Google have already announced its paid content over Youtube and the new video advertising technology.
Along with TV, advertising also has to make its way to the eco-system and we already know of many rumors over Apple and Google coming with ways to prevent viewers from skipping the ads. This provides great opportunity for TV Channels to enter into the Internet. Hence 2010 will certainly see hand and hand cooperation of the Internet providers and the Online TV channels.
7. Cloud Computing
Cloud computing will be the new way of doing business over the internet. It will be more of virtual resources management, where company can optimize his/her resources according to needs and dynamic adaption to changes. This will allow companies to greatly enhance their products and services. Cloud computing will also leverage the potential of web applications in the Internet and we might be seeing some great online applications for users and also enterprise solutions.
8. Augmented Reality
Augmented Reality is going to blow people’s mind in 2010. With the help of mobile computing, GPS technology, mobile camera and Google maps, mobile applications are going to have much more power to bring the experience to the user than in past.
Further, the core of the technology will be the mobile camera and the placement of processed information on top of live streaming contents from the camera.
We are already seeing some of it with mobile GPS applications, but 2010 will clearly put these applications on the top shelf of mobile apps. This will allow users to get information by integrating physical reality and virtual world.
9. Online Microsoft Office
Microsoft did face a lot of failures in 2009, starting with its slow rise of Bing and failure of Windows Mobile 6.5. So 2009 was not the year for Microsoft, but we could expect more from Microsoft in 2010. It’s Windows 7 have received good reviews, hence in 2010 we may get to read more about it. Windows Mobile 7 is also on its way, it might help Microsoft gain over their Smartphone market share.
But above all, we might get to read about Microsoft’s online OS. With the strength of today’s computing power over the Internet, the time is right for Online Office Suite. We have already seen the success of the Google Docs, so the speculation is high for Online Office. Hopefully this will reduce their cost and avoid nagging updates. The new competition is obviously on the Internet.
10. Mobile Transaction (Mobile Banking)
We surely need to get rid of credit cards and debit cards. They have already become less attractive in terms of monetary transaction. Once mobile phones starthandling our financial details, we will see a huge potential for mobile transactions and mobile banking.
Mobile application builders have already started making applications for enterprise solution by adopting enterprise protocol. For mobile banking and transactions to be successful we need an enterprise solution over the mobile network, similar to RIM’s Blackberry, which will confirm security over the mobile transaction.
The year 2010 will certainly see the glimpse of future’s monetary transaction.
So when we look ahead in 2010, we will see that the innovation has just begun. So here are the lists of technologies, which I think, will rock the year 2010. Most of the technologies that will be mentioned are related to online media and the Internet.
1. Apple’s Tablet
The noises and speculations are too high to ignore the presence of Apple’s Tablet. If all the rumors are authentic and, if by all means, Apple launches the iSlate on 25th January, then it’s going to be the thing to talk about in 2010.
We must admit that a tablet is a concept that has been around us for a very long time. But it is still not the consumer device that people would die for. But after the increase in sales and demands of Amazon Kindle and Nook, the market is pretty sure that a tablet is soon to be the device to have. So at this time, if Apple can bring the device with the interface that people are looking for then that’s it – We have our new iPOD. It is not a biased statement, but a truth in some way.
The reason that I say is because Online Reading is something that every Internet users do and Tablet provides the best way to consume the Internet content. Though we might still be working on a Laptop, Tablet will be the way to consume digital content.
2. NetPhone
We are already seeing the importance of Google Voice, which many Americans have enjoyed. We already have a software like Skype which allows you to communicate through the internet data line.
This demonstrates that people are still comfortable with voice communication and it is not going to die. We would still want to call our friends and families and communicate. Hence, we might see more advancement in VOIP technology.
Though mobile network providers would have to play a hard battle with the VOIP services, the conflict between these two models will end once we have more and more VOIP services running in our mobile devices.
3. Net Neutrality
The rise of Smartphone have suddenly put a lot of pressure on the mobile network providers. The online content consumption and communication have stressed out the network providers. One of the prominent example is the failure of At&T to meet the iPhone’s demand. This have forced the content providers and distributors into two opposite poles.
Content providers like Google (YouTube for video content) consumes a lot of bandwidth. This is not good for the network providers because they have to face the burden of handling the requests. On the other hand, content providers don’t have to pay anything to the distributors. As a result, Network providers would have to increased their fees. Now, this brings a great conflict between the consumers, the providers and the distributors.
Net neutrality is all about giving full access to the Internet without any restrictions. But we still need to see some agreement between the providers and the distributors. Hence, we might be able to see some breakthroughs on Net Neutrality in 2010 which would solve the current problems.
4. Social Profile Management(Advanced Analytics)
Online Social Networking sites have blasted the news channel on each opportunities in 2009 and it will continue to do so in 2010. More and more real time contents would be distributed online and consumed by people. Online networking will see more than just sharing information.
2009 had an overwhelming reaction towards social media which created a lot of junk in the Internet. Currently, informations and contents go to waste and don’t make their way toward the targeted audiences.
2010 will see a revolution towards social profile management with advance analytics. This will be applying spam control over your networks and strengthening the efficiency of your network connections. As sites like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook are used in professional hiring, Profile search will also be a big thing. Social network provides a best way to reach out to potential businesses. Hence search (not for content) but for people should be big. Social profile management with advance analytics will be the next big thing for social networks
5. Virtualization
Client desktop computing is surely the new way towards connecting people to offices. Virtual desktops or Virtual machines will soon be employed in many offices providing better flexibility to hardware and software selection.
This will reduce the hardware cost of servers and desktops and CPU maintenance in office. This will also reduce the cost of softwares as most will be deployed in the virtual machines. This is a key to cutting costs, lowering complexity, as well as increasing agility as needs shift.
6. Online TV
YouTube and other online video sharing sites have almost killed Television. The new generations prefer Internet over TV channels. As with the music industry, TV channels have understood that going online is the only way towards future and they have to jump into this bandwagon before it’s too late.
There are already many commercial channels shifting their attention from TV to Youtube or other sites like Hulu. Further, Google have already announced its paid content over Youtube and the new video advertising technology.
Along with TV, advertising also has to make its way to the eco-system and we already know of many rumors over Apple and Google coming with ways to prevent viewers from skipping the ads. This provides great opportunity for TV Channels to enter into the Internet. Hence 2010 will certainly see hand and hand cooperation of the Internet providers and the Online TV channels.
7. Cloud Computing
Cloud computing will be the new way of doing business over the internet. It will be more of virtual resources management, where company can optimize his/her resources according to needs and dynamic adaption to changes. This will allow companies to greatly enhance their products and services. Cloud computing will also leverage the potential of web applications in the Internet and we might be seeing some great online applications for users and also enterprise solutions.
8. Augmented Reality
Augmented Reality is going to blow people’s mind in 2010. With the help of mobile computing, GPS technology, mobile camera and Google maps, mobile applications are going to have much more power to bring the experience to the user than in past.
Further, the core of the technology will be the mobile camera and the placement of processed information on top of live streaming contents from the camera.
We are already seeing some of it with mobile GPS applications, but 2010 will clearly put these applications on the top shelf of mobile apps. This will allow users to get information by integrating physical reality and virtual world.
9. Online Microsoft Office
Microsoft did face a lot of failures in 2009, starting with its slow rise of Bing and failure of Windows Mobile 6.5. So 2009 was not the year for Microsoft, but we could expect more from Microsoft in 2010. It’s Windows 7 have received good reviews, hence in 2010 we may get to read more about it. Windows Mobile 7 is also on its way, it might help Microsoft gain over their Smartphone market share.
But above all, we might get to read about Microsoft’s online OS. With the strength of today’s computing power over the Internet, the time is right for Online Office Suite. We have already seen the success of the Google Docs, so the speculation is high for Online Office. Hopefully this will reduce their cost and avoid nagging updates. The new competition is obviously on the Internet.
10. Mobile Transaction (Mobile Banking)
We surely need to get rid of credit cards and debit cards. They have already become less attractive in terms of monetary transaction. Once mobile phones starthandling our financial details, we will see a huge potential for mobile transactions and mobile banking.
Mobile application builders have already started making applications for enterprise solution by adopting enterprise protocol. For mobile banking and transactions to be successful we need an enterprise solution over the mobile network, similar to RIM’s Blackberry, which will confirm security over the mobile transaction.
The year 2010 will certainly see the glimpse of future’s monetary transaction.
Minggu, 20 Desember 2009
Wi-Fi in the Cars
Wi-Fi in the Cars Facilities entertainment system is a necessary condition for automotive manufacturers world to provide added value to the output cars. Since 1930, Cars has been mated to devices such as radio and DVD devices until now had been immersed in various cars. The development of entertainment facilities, is now growing. General Motors as the largest automotive manufacturers began to make a breakthrough by installing Wi-Fi devices in the output cars.
As reported by Cellular-newa the user a Chevrolet Equinox, Traverse, Silverado, and the Express can surf the Internet from the car. Chevrolet Accessories Manager Chris Rauser said Wi-Fi systems are installed in the car production may be accessed a laptop or Wi-Fi device to another 150 feet radius around the car Wi-Fi will provide benefit to users, especially for professionals who need quick information even while on the street or a vacation with family," said Chris. To install the Wi-Fi in the car, the user must spend approximately USD199 per month cost difference of $ 29.
As reported by Cellular-newa the user a Chevrolet Equinox, Traverse, Silverado, and the Express can surf the Internet from the car. Chevrolet Accessories Manager Chris Rauser said Wi-Fi systems are installed in the car production may be accessed a laptop or Wi-Fi device to another 150 feet radius around the car Wi-Fi will provide benefit to users, especially for professionals who need quick information even while on the street or a vacation with family," said Chris. To install the Wi-Fi in the car, the user must spend approximately USD199 per month cost difference of $ 29.
Online casino games
Online casino games were recently become an option for the community, because the room we can play without having to go to the casino. But you should know you also have to can find a good place casino and quality-tested, and quick service is to it before taking the plunge into online casinos there are some simple steps before you have to deposit your hard earned money to the casinos.
This is what you need:
First choose the game you are familiar with, you might have something playing in the land-based casinos in the past such as Blackjack, Keno or roulette or your game comfortably.
Find online casinos
that offer free online casino games, so you can familiarize yourself with the game before you plop down your hard earned money.
Once you find an online casino sites that offer games you want, do a little research online, do a search on Google or Yahoo and make sure that they do not cheat or casinos blacklisted casinos.
Before you see the deposit bonus casinos and options terms and conditions before playing, if you have any questions do not hesitate to use the casinos support to ask a few pre-game choice questions. Most online casinos offer 24 / 7 support most e-mail, live chat, or phone
Remember just because it has lots of bells, whistles casinos and make sure you really feel comfortable with me personally if I do not get that warm fuzzy feeling I switch to something that I believe totally.
This is what you need:
First choose the game you are familiar with, you might have something playing in the land-based casinos in the past such as Blackjack, Keno or roulette or your game comfortably.
Find online casinos
that offer free online casino games, so you can familiarize yourself with the game before you plop down your hard earned money.
Once you find an online casino sites that offer games you want, do a little research online, do a search on Google or Yahoo and make sure that they do not cheat or casinos blacklisted casinos.
Before you see the deposit bonus casinos and options terms and conditions before playing, if you have any questions do not hesitate to use the casinos support to ask a few pre-game choice questions. Most online casinos offer 24 / 7 support most e-mail, live chat, or phone
Remember just because it has lots of bells, whistles casinos and make sure you really feel comfortable with me personally if I do not get that warm fuzzy feeling I switch to something that I believe totally.
Provide Video Conference Call
Is there a service that can meet all your communication needs without spending a large amount of money? You are in the Internet Age and is now in touch with your friends and family lived across the 7 seas is only a matter of clicks. again we have discussed about SnapYap, which can be used for video calls without installing software. Until now there are a number of services that provide free or Cheap VOIP calls, but only a few that there who provide Video Conferencing facility for free. Today we will discuss about the www.conferencegenie.co.uk provide video conference call
facilities for upto 120 Free people at one time.
www.conferencegenie.co.uk offers Free Video Conferencing calls around the world. The main point we like most is the Video Conferencing upto 120 people at a single time. This service is completely free of charge. Look at the main points of the service. After reviewing the main points, we can conclude that there is no doubt www.conferencegenie.co.uk good service and worth a try. This is very good for people who want to have free services with Video Conferencing Video and Audio High quality. www.conferencegenie.co.uk VOIP service deficiencies in the service call to dwarf the ordinary telephone service from Skype or Yahoo Messenger.
facilities for upto 120 Free people at one time.
www.conferencegenie.co.uk offers Free Video Conferencing calls around the world. The main point we like most is the Video Conferencing upto 120 people at a single time. This service is completely free of charge. Look at the main points of the service. After reviewing the main points, we can conclude that there is no doubt www.conferencegenie.co.uk good service and worth a try. This is very good for people who want to have free services with Video Conferencing Video and Audio High quality. www.conferencegenie.co.uk VOIP service deficiencies in the service call to dwarf the ordinary telephone service from Skype or Yahoo Messenger.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)