Living in the world of high tech means, at least to me, that we play by a different set of rules. Many tech companies are seen as innovative, strategic and forward-thinking, while others are clumsy, slow and reactionary. I started thinking about this issue after I read a recent Op Ed in the New York Times written by former Microsoft executive Dick Brass. In this article Brass ripped Microsoft for not being terribly innovative and commented that part of the issue resides in the company’s corporate culture. It ruffled feathers so much that fellow Microsoft PR pro Frank Shaw posted a response on The Microsoft Blog defending the company.

Similarly, CNET recently took some shots about the engineering-driven culture at Google and questioned whether the company could tackle the growth of social media.

I took a step back to ponder this issue for a while. I’m not going to argue if Microsoft is innovative or if Google’s corporate culture might get in the way of improving its social media capabilities. Rather, what does this mean for the PR pros in the high tech world?

Start-ups generally get a few years to make good on their initial ideas. Engineering doesn’t simply happen overnight. Start-ups seem to gain acceptance early on, probably because their ideas sound interesting and people are always willing to support the underdog. But Microsoft was young once and yet now, some 35 years later, they are mocked for their lack of innovation.

“But part of the problem is communication: the term “innovation” largely has lost its meaning and has become a buzzword for big companies to use whenever they want to sound competitive and forward-thinking.” Gregory T. Huang, Xconomy

The more I thought about these issues, the more I realized that this has to do with brand. When a company is young it is energetic, full of ideas and many times referred to as “innovative”. As the company builds a strong brand reputation over time, it’s important to remain true to its principles. Your company cannot rest on its laurels as Microsoft appears to have done, for example in the mobile space as my colleague Brian Edwards pointed out recently. Create new things, share unusual ideas and push the limits so that you won’t be accused of being a sell-out.

Savvy PR agencies understand how the bell curve works: young companies are innovative and entrepreneurial, as they get older innovation slows down and they typically become complacent (sort of like Microsoft with the Windows and Office monopoly) and can grind to a halt due to red tape and internal politics and then they can slide in a downward spiral as more nimble competitors race by.

So, have Microsoft and Google sold out? Is innovation dead at the large high tech players? Are game-changing ideas only going to come from the small, nimble start-ups? Creative, enthusiastic and aggressive PR pros know how to help companies stay the course and continue to build trust in their brand throughout every stage of a company’s growth and maturity curve.

Ok, so I don’t mean to be on a blogging rut focused on analyzing advertisements but I saw this commercial a few days ago and it struck me as an example of a smart way to use your industry leadership. In one of their latest commercials Lysol is positioning one of their employees as a key spokesperson. He’s not just any employee but Joe Rubino, the Director of Microbiology for Lysol Products. He introduces himself and then proceeds to give tips on how to kill the H1N1 virus in your home … oh and by the way…one of the tips is to use Lysol disinfectant spray and cloths.

My first thought is, “Wow, so Lysol has a Director for Microbiology? That’s pretty cool!” And then my second thought is, “Wow, so they care enough to show consumers how to make sure their home is safe from the H1N1 virus?” This ad represents a good example of how to not only use but to substantiate your position as a leader within your industry. Lysol is not only reinforcing their leadership position but also coming across as experts who really care about the consumer. They are doing this by not being in the consumer’s face about how great their product is, but by using a strategy of offering helpful tips on how to keep your home safe.

Where Lysol is missing the mark – and maybe this campaign has been out for a while and I missed it – is in timing. H1N1 is very close to becoming irrelevant. The threat is still there but nothing like it was a few months ago. Lysol may still be within the window, but much of the impact from an effective campaign is being lost with the onset of spring and the decline in flu virus. Well there’s always next year…

More than six years ago, I answered a query in a chat room.  A woman in LA was looking for radio interviewers.  As a long-time news anchor, reporter and author-interviewer, I symbolically raised my hand.

And then.

I lowered it.

She was looking for podcasters.  I’d never done a podcast.

She asked, “Have you hosted and produced radio shows?”

“Probably hundreds of radio shows, all lengths,” I quickly answered.

“Then,” she said, “you’ve done hundreds of podcasts. You’re hired.”

Oh! So, that’s a podcast!

Since then, I’ve hosted and produced more than a hundred more podcasts for authors, high tech clients, MBA and Law School students, and others.  Podcasts are real, dynamic conversations that you can listen to anytime, anyplace.  The word stems from a blend of “broadcasting” and “iPods.”  Or, as Wired described it in a March 2005 article, “the bastard offspring of the blog and the Apple MP3 player.”

Podcast popularity is rising rapidly.  The respected Pew organization did a study in late 2008 on the habits of web users.  The Pew Internet and American Life Project found 19-percent of Internet users downloaded podcasts, and this is up from twelve-percent two years prior to that.

Other stats – men more likely than women to download, and under-fifty more likely than over-fifty.  But, again, that was two years ago.

The Pew 2008 study shows more than 43,000 podcasts were produced — more than double the 2006 figure, and that technology is the most popular sector.  More than 4,000 podcasts were available then.  Wonder how many now?  I know I’ve pumped in a bunch.

Searching for ever more current stats, I find eMarketer projecting the growth will continue at least for the next three years, when there will be 37.6 million people downloading podcasts on a monthly basis.  That’s double the 2008 figures.  No question the trend is up.

Thankfully, podcasting is more than grabbing a mic and some software.  Paul Verna, eMarketer senior analyst and author of the report, Podcasting Into the Mainstream says “Today, the vast majority of the top-rated podcasts come from recognizable media entities that are using podcasts to expand their existing radio, TV, cable, or satellite audiences.”

The thing about podcasts is that they’re so convenient. They’re especially effective for high technology.  Entertaining.  Informative. Like a conversation between business associates.  And you can listen in anywhere.

Nothing lasts forever.  Not even cash cows.

In the fast moving technology world, standing still with old technology is a sure recipe for failure. Or as an old boss used to say, you can put lipstick on the pig, but it’s still a pig.

Unfortunately, there are way too many examples of companies that once were on top but failed to realize, until it was too late, that technology had marched on and their once groundbreaking, industry leading technology had become obsolete.  The tech industry is littered with examples of computing giants that bit the dust by resting on their laurels.

One that impacted me was Digital Equipment Corp.  While the movement toward open operating systems and PCs was in full swing, DEC chairman Ken Olsen called Unix “snake oil” and derided PCs as little more than toys.  That was until PC maker Compaq swallowed him up and shut down the DEC brand. Read the rest of this entry »

Committing to buying a spot in the Super Bowl is always a big risk due to the vast sums of money at stake.  For those with the wherewithal to pull it off, a big splash around the Super Bowl may generate more buzz than a year’s worth of mediocrity.

The year’s game, featuring one of football’s biggest stars in Peyton Manning and the feel good story of the past year in the New Orleans Saints, was the most watched TV show in the United States ever with 106.5 million viewers.  With all the entertainment options people have now compared to when the previous record was set by the MASH finale in 1983, this is an amazing accomplishment.  Read the rest of this entry »

One of the more important relationships tech firms needs to have is with industry analysts. It’s quite a symbiotic relationship. Industry analysts from the likes of Gartner, Forrester and AMR need to be kept up to date as to what new technology is being created or is available now in order to seem knowledgeable with their clients. At the same time tech vendors need to secure the air cover that analysts provide when a firm is announcing new products or new strategies. The relationship has to work both ways for each side to prosper.

However, while I hold many industry analysts in high regard, I’ve often chuckled at the thought of someone actually holding analysts accountable on industry predictions. On some level aren’t analysts just as bad about predictions as your local weatherman? Read the rest of this entry »

Ok, I know there’s a football game going on as well, but for me, it’s all about the commercials. Anyone remember the Bud Bowls of the late ‘80s-early 90’s? I see the unveiling of these multimillion commercials, that often represent an entire year’s worth of advertising budget, as the biggest event of the year. I love watching the commercials in real-time but I will also Tivo the Superbowl and then fast forward through the game to get to the commercials. I wonder if anyone else does that since it probably does seem to be a bit backward. Ok ok, “My name is Stephanie and I’m a total advertising/marketing nerd.”

When I started my PR career, I was taught to always ask the question…why? So… why are these companies investing in this type of advertising campaign now? Why did they choose the Superbowl? Why did they take this direction with their commercial? Why are the putting all their eggs in one basket with this huge multi-million dollar commercial? Why did the choose the spokesperson/actor they did? Why, Why Why?? And the after all the why’s…I’m dying to know…how are they going to follow this up? What’s their plan to leverage and continue the momentum started with this commercial? Will they engage social media strategies and if not…why? Yes, lots of questions! I know!!

So anyway, come Sunday…I’ll be eagerly watching the Superbowl…but I’ll be the only one getting snacks during the game, so I can be at full attention for the commercials!

There’s inherent synergy between a company sales department and the PR team. I was recently reminded of how valuable it can for PR to stay tapped into what’s happening on the ground – and for PR to in turn contribute to the sales effort.

The obvious connection is with the new customers who buy a company’s solution and agree to be part of various PR activities. The sales team can then of course use articles in their sales materials.

There are other ways though that these two groups can work effectively together. On a recent conference call, I had a chance to speak with a few marketing folks who are in tight communication with their sales force. The purpose of the call was to go over upcoming editorial calendar opportunities for the target publications for the prioritized vertical markets.

As we were reviewing the topics, one of the marketing folks brought up that they had been working with the sales team on RFP’s that directly related to more than a few of the editorial calendar opportunities. Not only did these RFP’s directly address the editorial calendar topics but they were responding to real-world customer scenarios that were specific to the customer’s needs, giving us unique slants to use in our pitches. Wow! How cool!

We now have a monthly call with the sales team to review the upcoming editorial calendar topics, making sure to tap into each other’s pool of knowledge and the information gathered for pitches and for RFP’s.

Why is it that everyone seems to be in such a hurry in life? What is this irresistible craving we have for speed? Now I must admit that I grew up in the 1980s as part of the MTV generation so my attention span is pretty limited. Even Lisa Simpson, in an episode of The Simpsons, commented that (and I’m paraphrasing here) “we grew up in the MTV generation so we have an attention span of less than a minute.”

Armed with a short attention span and living in a business world where time apparently does equal money, we need to find ways to cut corners so we can be more productive. I completely understand that. Technologies like cell phones and mobile computing keep me stay connected to my work and help improve my productivity. But seriously, have we taken the whole speed-productivity-simplifying everything a little too far?

Which brings me to my question of the day: how many acronyms does the high tech world need? Why must we shorten everything so that we can talk faster?

The other day I was configuring my daughter’s new laptop. In the middle of cursing up a storm (yes, I’m technologically challenged J), in the same sentence I said, “just plug that into the USB drive, I’ll hook it up to the Wi-Fi network and the printer and then you’ll have your own SOHO set-up.” She looked at me like I was from Mars.

In an effort to help simplify everyone’s life in the tech world and help improve productivity I recommend that we combine some high tech acronyms. How about these?

CRM and ERP? Would that be CREEP?

HIPAA and BPO? Would that be HIPPO?

GUI and NIMBY? Would that be GUMBY?

SOHO and SAP? Would that be SOAP?

SMB and AC? Would that be SMAC?

Really now…SaaS, IP, VOIP, FOIP, ISO, CMOS, HTTP, RFID, FTP, OEM and EMEA …it never stops.

So what’s your opinion? Has the tech world taken acronyms too far?

Tablets like what Steve Jobs and Apple just introduced have long been forecast in science fiction, so you just knew that sooner or later devices like this would become reality.

For example, in Arthur C. Clarke’s 1968 novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, Clarke describes something called a “Newspad” that Heywood Floyd, “plugs into the ship’s information circuit and scans the latest reports from Earth. One by one he would conjure up the world’s major electronic papers; he knew the codes of the more important ones by heart, and had no need to consult the list on the back of his pad. Switching to the display unit’s short-term memory, he would hold the front page while he quickly searched the headlines and noted the items that interested him.”

While there will be little need to know codes by heart, Clarke’s vision of getting electronic papers on a pad-like device is finally here.  To be sure the iPad is likely far from perfect, I fully expect that it will inevitably become more refined and in the process move us much further to full electronic delivery of premier content – much of which is currently paper-based.

Sure you can get content on either a smartphone or a laptop, but neither is ideal. The smartphone is just too small and the laptop is too clumsy. I just don’t find myself sitting at breakfast surfing news on my laptop, or trying to peer into a tiny screen on the BlackBerry.

Instead I get volumes of newspaper – big piles of it that inevitably end up being recycled.  Speaking of which, the environmental impact of all that paper is not good. Paper consumes large amounts of water and energy, levels forests, and requires many gallons of fuel to get it to my doorstep. Electronic delivery has almost zero impact in comparison.

I can, however, imagine using the iPad as my daily news feed. What’s more there’s economic justification simply on the basis of replacing paid-for printed content I currently consume.  While I expect to still pay for the electronic content, the price will go down significantly.  Note that some of the publications have yet to adopt eReader technology like what the NY Times currently offers, but publishers that expect to survive will offer similar technology. Based on my calculations, I figure I could save $652 per year, easily justifying a $499 iPad.

Beyond lowering costs, the iPad will deliver a much improved experience.  Publishers will be able to blend video and printed words. Instead of a few photos, I will be able to see the entire sequence if I so desire. I’ll also be able to look up related information, or make comments. Basically it’s everything we love about the Web, but in a nice magazine-like format.  When I’m travelling, all I’ll need to pack is my iPad and a cell phone. No longer will I need magazines, books, media player, GPS, or even a laptop. And, of course, there will be countless numbers of cool apps.

Sounds like science fiction? Not anymore.