User Submitted!
164

It is better to be thought a fool...

Heather has a specific job at Microsoft - and her blog helps her do that job (which is not to do recruiting).  Another Microsoft blogger, without high traffic, might bring in more candidates.  Does that mean that Heather is more important than an employment blogger who brings in three great people a year?

Whose to say? 

Most important - who exactly do we turn to for blog metrics? I wrote a post yesterday citing this very problem, and it quotes a ClickZ article speaking to Henry Copeland, the CEO of Blogads

"Most ofthe stuff that goes on in blogs is currently unmeasurable...which is tosay the buzziness of it," he said. "We started doing this because wethink blogs are uniquely influential. In the long run, if bloggers aregoing to get premium value for their ads, you want to move beyond a CPCor even a CPA environment. You want your media buyers to understandthat something sold to an influential is better than something sold tosome guy in Wooster, Ohio (which I can pick on because it's myhometown.)"

If Henry Copeland can't figure it out yet, who has?  Metrics can be important when you are selling a product - and yes, most things can be improved by measuring performance - but in some instances, measuring performance gets in the way of simply doing a job.  Blogging is one of those instances.

Here's an example: There are bloggers who drive traffic to their sites posting pictures of naked women.  Heather doesn't do that - even though it would raise traffic.  Neither does John.  Presumably, this is because the traffic is not as important as their dignity.  They have reasons for posting that are completely separate from the need to increase performance.  How do you measure that?  I guess you could say that the pictures would drive the wrong people to the site, and the right people away - but are there studies done to prove this?  Of course not. 

It is assumed.  It is a human being making a judgement for reasons not easily measured.  And that is at the core of Heather's blogging.  She does it because it makes her better at her job, and people seem to like it.  Trying to measure that is like trying to program salespeople to be more likable.  It almost always fails, and no one knows why.  It's the beauty of the human condition.

And this is where John fails.  He confuses the importance of numbers with the importance of people, even though his numbers don't accurately reflect his own influence.  In the end, he treated Heather, not as a person with feelings, but as just another object in a study.

As for his attacks - well - he is in the blogosphere.  People make mistakes.  He has the ability to correct his mistake and apologize. 

John H
Tue, 03/07/2006 - 6:33pm

I suspect this is just adding some pop to the upcoming panel. John's use of clichés and labels (Pollyanna is open to individual interpretation)are akin to adding tobasco sauce to pep up an otherwise mediocre chili.

Who knew metrics were such a bone of contention? Ohmigod, do the numbers back that up?

Tue, 03/07/2006 - 7:39pm

I've been reading Sumser regularly for some time and it seems like he blows a sprocket every six months and tees off on somebody. To paraphrase an old saying, a man who publishes himself has a fool for an editor.

Still, if one strips away the style of the piece, I'd agree with the substance. The way Heather's post read to me was, "I know what I'm doing is good and that's all the justification I need." This is wishful thinking at best, rank featherbedding at worst. If you applied this line of thinking to a project like a new product or direct-mail campaign, management would laugh you out of the room, and rightly so.

What Sumser doesn't allow for is that there's also truth in Heather's post, in that one shouldn't get lost in false metrics. Business blogging is still in essence an entrepreneurial venture with an uncertain roadmap. In this game vision will get you a lot farther than bookkeeping. Had Sumser paused to consider this he might have been a bit more charitable.

Tue, 03/07/2006 - 9:13pm

I want to be Sumserized, too! Please, John, give me my shot at glory. A full page on Sumser's site. Please, keep me in mind.

Tue, 03/07/2006 - 11:25pm

Sorry to be so dense... what did Heather write that was so wrong? (I have some thoughts but they have nothing to do with what this other guy writes and are nit picks anyway.)

And what exactly is this other guy's point save his memory for a very old bit from the original SNL.

I'm lost.

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 12:58am

Actually, it was a take off on 60 Minutes. The show used to end with Point/Counterpoint featuring Conservative James Kirkpatrick and liberal Shana Alexander.

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 1:07am

Sorry that was Kilpatrick. He was a conservative so I was thinking of Russell Kirkpatrick.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1579553#1579699

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 3:42am

I apologize in advance for this out-of-place comment. I stumbled upon your blog because I'm trying to learn all I can about recruiting so that I can be recruited and land a job in Manhattan.

It's such a demoralizing experience to apply for dozens upon dozens of jobs - with cover letters and resumes specially geared toward each particular position - and get nothing but automated responses. I'm sure you hear this constantly and could have done without the reminder.

Anyway...

How does a person get a recruiter who will help her land a job in NYC?! Please ask me more.

I even put my resume in a place where you can see if you are curious. Since I can't include html in here, the link is looong and ugly. http://static.flickr.com/35/109429455_999fb423e8_o.jpg

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 4:51am

Rebecca, put your resume on a blogspot blog. It's free and it won't look awful like a jpg.

It would pay to get a URL that is easy to remember and put it over your resume. It's not expensive.

Also visit this site and read his book.

www.gm4jh.com

Rob McIntosh
Wed, 03/08/2006 - 7:01am

I was taken aback by Sumsers personal attack on Heather and clearly he could have gotten his point across without needing to take the approach he did....incredibly disapointing and childish for a so called industry thought leader!!

This whole discussion has got me thinking on not so much on how to measure corporate recruiting blog traffic, links, posts, hires etc, as I think most of us agree these are squishy measures on success factors and a lot more comes into play......but rather, how can you measure if a blog or the person that is running the blog to know if they are doing a exceptional, fair or sub par job. How does someone know the answer to this question if you don't measure something? To first understand what success looks like you have a goal or an end outcome in mind. To understand if you have reached it or fallen short, you have to measure against where you are....No?

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 7:05am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_entity

The issue that Sumser avoids and Heather hits spot-on is that 'buzziness' is a working system; there are no single parts that are practical to measure that can give a reliable insight into the possible results.

Give me the metrics on Mona Lisa's smile or Natalie Portman's haircut or Brad Pitt's mug and tell me what they tell you. For that matter, measure the Microsoft 'office assistant' and tell me why it's loved so dearly.....

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 7:39am

We applaud Heather for her progressive recognition that the "ROI" achieved through participating in an online conversation with your audience is not measurable through standard marketing metrics. While some good ways to value and rank certain aspects of blogging will no doubt be found, there will always be a critical value that no spreadsheet will ever capture. Blogging is too new for people to come down so heavily on either the side of 'metrics or die' or 'you can never measure this.'

Coincidentally, I just came across a post that seems highly relevant by Steve Rubel (one of the most respected bloggers of the popular marketing industry blog Micropersuasion) - http://www.micropersuasion.com/2006/02/can_we_stop_wit.html

Steve writes:

"The fact is that one reason this so-called inequity is covered ad infinitum is because marketers and media (bloggers included) still rely on old-school approaches to measuring the impact of this new medium. We're trained as humans to look for the biggest apes in the jungle. However, that's not how this Cluetrain world always works.

First of all there are bloggers that can come out of nowhere and join the so-called elite group of top-ranked bloggers. Look at TechCrunch. It is rapidly rising up the charts.

Second, a blogger with two readers can become a reader with thousands in an instant and then fall back down to zero and then back to thousands again two months from now - or never again. Does that mean he/she is unimportant? Not."

Looks like Steve is on Heather's side.

Now, for some appropriate Deep Thoughts Wisdom from Jack Handey:

"I hope if dogs ever take over the world, and they chose a king, they don't just go by size, because I bet there are some Chihuahuas with some good ideas."

-Julian & Shannon

Wed, 03/08/2006 - 9:52pm

I hope others find this linked article to be directly applicible to the discussion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergent_property

Thu, 03/09/2006 - 1:20am

Regarding measurement, and to Rob's point, how is buzziness any different than accounting for goodwill? FASB has struggled for years to come up with working standards - and often these calculations come under fire - but at least they're trying...

Thu, 03/09/2006 - 3:56am

The biggest problem with blogging for business is that people enjoy doing it, and this will cause them to seek justification wherever they can find it. If people enjoyed cold-calling the same way, sales would be the lowest-paying profession in corporate America.

"Hard to measure" and "can't be measured" are completely different things. "Hard to measure" is TV spot advertising, in which everything has to be gauged on a statistical basis because you don't have cookies or clickthroughs to track. It's even challenging (and expensive) to say how many people liked an ad, let alone what impact that extra $50k in spend had on sales. But advertisers do try, very hard in fact, to come up with meaningful estimates.

A recruiting blog would be legitimately tricky because value for the company could come in many ways: more applicants, better candidates, higher offer acceptance rates, etc. But saying these things are hard to put precise numbers on does not make them go away.

Wed, 08/16/2006 - 9:31pm

I've been reading John's stuff for all 12 years, and years ago I was the subject of some of that stuff. I count having been skewered by John as one of the merit badges I've earned in business. It's taken me some time to come to terms with this. My earned appreciation is that he's right more often than wrong, which is more than I can say for 99% of the pundits and industry analysts I've read or have worked with. *That* is the metric he should be measured by. No offense to Ms. H, but she built her audience on someone else's very popular brand. John's stood comfortably alone and comfortably in the middle of the pack for a long time now and he's no one to keep happy about the integrity of his work other than himself. This is a tough act to manage consistently well over time, but it's worth it as it can move industries forward, which John has. He works to define the boundaries that the rest of us work within. The freedom we have within these boundaries we owe to people like John. For that, we owe him our patience and understanding when he blows the occasional gasket. Defining emerging markets is a bitch of a job, but he does it well. Not many of us have the stomach or the guts for it. Count your blessings daily, and count your daily email from Carrie Baggs as one of them.

Cheers,

Kevin Johansen

Entrepreneur in Residence

The Davinci Institute

KWJ@DavinciInstitute.com

Heather
Thu, 08/17/2006 - 8:09pm

No offense taken. I absolutely acknowledge that the fact that the word "Microsoft" is attached to my title is a big part of why people find my blog, though without the work I put into it (I am making no comments on the perceived quality of that work...that's for the target reader to decide), they surely would not come back to it. The greater part of the interest is Microsoft, in my opinion. I have an appreciation for the fact that "Microsoft" is a huge draw (though, I don't think of it as "someone else's brand"...I don't think it belongs to "someone"). It's not an ego exercise for me...it's part of my job, so Microsoft receives benefit for my usage of the brand as it's attached to the blog. My work is focused on further building Microsoft's brand, not borrowing it for my own purposes.

I may or may not agree with the rest of what you said, but wanted to let you know that no offense was taken, Kevin.

Thu, 08/17/2006 - 8:23pm

Let me put to rest the idea that Microsoft is the sole reason for Heather's success. There are thousands of Microsoft blogs. Thousands. Heather's is one of the more popular. If having Microsoft next to your blog is the only thing that mattered, every Microsoft blog would be popular.

And while we're at it - there is a lot of false information thrown around about why people from Microsoft blog, and how this big PR push was the result of Microsoft looking to use blogs to fix its image.

I've asked every Microsoft person I know about it, and every one has given me a different answer.

let me just come out and say that you can't "create" thousands of bloggers in a short period of time and control their message. You can help promote it - you can help by not squashing it, and you can identify what happened after the fact.

But the idea that employee blogs were a closely coordinated PR campagn is laughable, no matter who is pushing it.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <img> <span> <p> <br> <br/>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
More information about formatting options