Ina is organising a Twestival in Galway this Thursday (Feb 12th).  Twestival is taking place in over 175 cities around the world and is organised by volunteers:

On 12 February 2009 175+ cities around the world will be hosting Twestivals which bring together Twitter communities for an evening of fun and to raise money and awareness for charity: water.The Twestival is organized 100% by volunteers in cities around the world and 100% of the money raised from these events will go directly to support charity: water projects.

It’s taking place in upstairs in Nimmos (by the Spanish Arch) in aid of charity:water

charity: water is a non profit organization bringing clean, safe drinking water to people in developing nations by funding sustainable clean water solutions in areas of greatest need

If you can’t make the Twestival, you can still donate to charit:water on their site. If you’re not in Galway on Thursday evening, there are also ones taking place in Dublin and Belfast.

As someone who works on the web a lot, I use quite a number of web-based services. For some, and particularly those that are getting established, if I spot a problem I’ll often send an email or leave a comment so that they can fix it. As someone developing web applications, I know that I would appreciate someone taking the time to point out a problem that I had missed. In the end, I know it will result in a better service for me, and in them being able to offer their customers something that works better.

Having done this a number of times I’ve noticed three levels of response:

1. A Personal Response

This could be someone replying to a mail or a blog comment, and maybe look for more information about the problem, or just saying thank you for pointing it out.

2. An Automated Response

Often when you send a mail to support channels, you will get an automated response saying the message has been received, and is being routed to someone to be dealt with. It has not fallen into a dark black hole somewhere. In many companies, that have lots of customers and support requests, a huge amount of time could be spent personally responding to individual users. Obviously, this time could be more productively used any fixing problems that are identified.

3. The Deathly Sound of Silence

I’ve found that the majority of cases are met with no response at all. This may be because they are feverishly working to fix the problem that’s been spotted, or that the message fell between the cracks never to be seen again. Who knows.

It’s about relationships

I was reading an article on Empathy & Social Media, about developing relationships with customers by establishing trust. In the article, the argument is that Conversation + Sincerity + Empathy = Trust; the idea being that without trust, you will have no customers. It is the first part of that equation that I’m interested in: conversation. If a user of your product or service starts a conversation with you, engaging with them is a useful step. Without doing so, how can there be a basis for a relationship, or any trust?

By way of an example, I recently started using a web-based service provided by an Irish company. When I went to access the service one day, I found it wasn’t working, so I sent in a support request to find out if it was a problem on my end, or theirs. And got no response. When trying to figure it out, I found two more (unrelated) problems, and sent them a mail to let them know. And got no response. I know that this company will eventually be charging for their service, and I also know I won’t be one of their customers. If there is no relationship there, why would I trust (and pay) them to run the service in the future?

Users have options when it comes to many services offered on the web. Establishing a relationship with them is one means of creating emotional switching costs. Doing so makes them less likely to abandon your service for your competitors

The other side of this are companies that proactively look to engage with their customers. By doing so, they develop relationships, find new ideas and get feedback on their services. A recent trend is connecting direclty with customers using Twitter (a service to connect with people and broadcast & receive short messages on the web). There are examples of companies, both in Ireland and Internationally, using this method to interact with their customers. But this is not the only way. Sometimes it’s as easy as responding to an email.

In certain areas, for example academic research, constructive criticism through the reviews of others working in the same area is how work is evaluated. Doing so allows those involved to improve their work based on the input of fresh ideas and perspectives. Weaknesses are identified, and in doing so, those producing the work (and those using it afterward) benefit.

I am often involved in offering advice on the redesign of existing websites. In such cases, and particularly when the site or content has been developed in-house, there can be the reaction like that you would expect if (not when!) you were to tell someone they have an ugly baby. Immediately adopting a defensive position in such cases is not always the most productive approach (when talking about websites, not babies, in which case it may be justified!).

Feedback is a good thing – use it wisely

It can often be difficult to get honest feedback on your website, or any aspect of your business for that matter. In cases where it is offered, it is often worthwhile to consider it. This is particularly true when it is unbiased or unsolicited, for example, through feedback from customers, discussion on unrelated websites (for example, message boards, etc.). There are numerous examples of discussion forums frequented by designers & developers (for example, in Ireland Creative Ireland, Irish Webmaster Forum). These forums provide access to experienced professionals who freely offer their time and opinions on new websites. Such objective feedback can often appear to be harsh, but it is rarely wantonly so. Taking such opinions on board can allow subtle changes to new sites leading to their improvement before a wider public launch.

Look at feedback objectively

Looking at the feedback you get objectively, and not taking it personally, are important steps in keeping your sanity. While a lot of time, money and effort may have been spent before you get suggestions, even small changes may be beneficial.

In situations where you are using external consultants, designers or developers, taking on board their opinions is important. While you understand your business in more depth than they will, they should understand their business better than you do. That is not to say that all advice should be followed without question, there should be a reason, and a business case, for all suggestions. In such situations, it is far worse to get no opinion than one with which you disagree. By looking objectively at the alternatives, you will be in a better position to make an informed decision.

Evaluate the Source – Wisdom of crowds?

While feedback can be found from many sources evaluating those providing it is important. The “wisdom of crowds” or “crowdsourcing” has gained traction in recent times with the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies. The idea behind this is that leveraging the knowledge of large numbers of people will provide more useful information than a small number of consultants.  While this may be true, and in many cases extremely useful, realising that not everyone is an expert should be considered.

Lessons

The availability of feedback on new web design and development projects can be of huge benefit to both small and large businesses.  By welcoming a fresh perspective improvements can be achieved before a wider public release of any site.  In accepting feedback it is important however, to look at the feedback objectively and to evaluate the source before accepting suggestions at face-value. It may just help your baby grow into something more beautiful!

The decision to adopt any innovation is influenced by a number of factors. Some of these factors are general (they have been found to be of influence in many types of innovations), while others are specific to the context (for example, the company’s current situation & the innovation itself). For companies deciding on the use of new web technologies (for example, basic websites, e-marketing applications, e-commerce systems or new types of social media technologies) it can be difficult to decide how to assess their options. While every situation differs, a number of factors can be considered.

Benefits over your alternatives?

Firstly, what are the relative benefits of using the particular technology over any of the alternatives that are available? These benefits depend on the technology you are considering, but some examples are the direct financial or marketing benefits that choosing to use one technology over another will bring.

For example, when looking at ways to communicate a marketing message with existing customers, companies have a range of options. They can use RSS news feeds, email newsletters, or SMS (Text Messages to Mobile phones). The benefits of the approach selected should be considered relative to those given by the other options – in this example, how likely are the customers to carry out a particular action based on each type of communication? (something also related to the type of message being sent).

The Complexity of the Technology

The second factor is how technically difficult it is set up the technology, and what are the range of skills needed to use it effectively. Looking again at the survey results mentioned earlier, 36% of SMEs did not find it easy to update their website. In one way, this can be viewed as the user not having the skills to deal with something that they see as complex. In this example however, the provision of adequate training or the integration of a user-friendly Content Management System (CMS) are two ways in which this complexity can be overcome.

Not all companies have staff with the skills necessary to use certain technologies. This is something that should be identified and dealt with while making the decision to invest in a particular technology, rather than after the investment has been made. Doing so will help realise the full benefits of your investment.

The Web and Your Business

The decision to buy and use any new technology (web-based included) should consider how, and where, it fits into how your business operates. This may be to do with other technologies you already have in place, the type of business you operate in, or the people involved in your business. It is important to understand what it will (and will not) bring to your business, and the possible impacts of its use.

Two (very) simple examples of this relate to the type of business. A manufacturer of heavy machinery may find their opportunities limited with an e-commerce type site that relies on mail order. Similarly, a small corner shop wishing to communicate with their customer base through Text Messaging may also run into problems (at first, at least). What these illustrate is not that these businesses cannot use the web to their benefit, instead, they should choose an option that fits with the type of business they operate.

Other Considerations

There are a wide range of other factors to be considered in a decision to adopt a new technology. Many of these depend on the specific situation of the business, and the characteristics of the technology being considered. Some broad examples can be to do with competitive environment, the demands of the market, or regulation or other legal issues.

What this article has tried to show is that SMEs should consider issues other than, “everyone else has X….we should too”, when investing in web technologies or applications. Instead, making the most of your investment depends on a careful analysis of a range of factors.

About the author

David Kelly runs Ambient Age. He is completing a PhD in Business Information Systems, and has published papers on the adoption of new technologies. He can be contacted here.

In it they identify 3 ways that negative publicity is normally dealt with:

1. Flame the Publishers (i.e. request that the site owner or publisher removes the content)
2. Get directly involved
3. Simply let it play out

Choosing the right course depends a lot on the nature of the negative publicity. In an ideal world, getting directly involved in order to address the issues can be useful for others reading the review. But doing this may not always be possible.

At the very least, the business owner should try and look at the review subjectively. Doing so may help identify areas they need to improve in the services they offer. In situations where business owners become confrontational on blogs or message boards, there is always a danger that readers who started out neutral will believe the worst….

In the past, corporate communications generally (in larger organisations) came through departments or staff that were specialised in that area. The company’s brand was developed and maintained using a variety of methods, including PR. The messages that were produced were tailored to portray a certain image of the organisation.

With the prevalence of blogs, message boards and social networks, those in companies (including the Owners / Directors / CEOs) can bypass formal communication channels. Doing so can have a range of positive effects. By interacting with the public and their customers, companies can give insights into their culture, processes, and attitudes to customer service. These types of interaction create transparency and build relationships with current, and potential, customers in ways that could not be accomplished using “traditional” communication methods.

On the other hand, should the Company Head have little to offer in the way of insights, portray a poor vision of the company’s culture & attitudes, or interact negatively with the public, the effects can be extremely detrimental. As in all walks of life, there are those whose strength is not communication. While they may be excellent at running their company, interacting with customers may not be a skill they have. The absence of such skills can be particularly telling when dealing with negative feedback or interactions. In such cases, the negative impact of the head of a company engaging in public disputes can be extremely damaging to their public image. A number of recent cases in Ireland have highlighted this, with the effects now being evident for anyone who Googles the names of the companies involved.

Should those in companies, including owners & CEOs, engage with users in a professional capacity on blogs, message boards, or social network sites, it would be wise to remember that it is not a one-to-one conversation. Instead, any disputes or negative comments can (and likely will) be found by potential customers in the future. While negative comments are often unavoidable, the approach taken in dealing with them is important, for example, providing considered responses, rather than abrupt reactions to negative comments, and taking criticisms on board are both useful. Doing so provides not only a source of information on how products or services can be improved, but also portrays a positive image of the company.