Soundview Executive Book Summaries


These Messages Do NOT Self-Destruct

How many times have you composed an e-mail in anger or frustration, sat back to review it, and then hit the Delete button? I expect that the delete feature has saved many a career. In fact, it’s good to be able to delete and forget many haunting, spontaneous actions we may have done. And maybe we’ve gotten a little obsessed in our digital record saving. We probably should be doing a little more deleting when you think about it.

This notion has the support of Viktor Mayer-Schonberger author of Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. He believes that in our saving frenzy we are not losing enough of our digital data and are guilty of “failing to forget.” He also points to examples of stalled careers and lost jobs through events captured on Facebook and YouTube, among other things, to prove his point.

In the Wall St Journal review of this book, the writer points out that perhaps it isn’t all bad that the digital world has such a long memory. It may just cause us to be more careful about what we post in the public realm.

Certainly, the recent surge of digital-themed books would lead one to believe that perhaps caution is the better solution than deletion. Here are just a few of the titles that we have been checking out recently: Behind the Cloud – about salesforce.com’s development of cloud computing, Viral Loop – how to grow a business from scratch through the use of social media, Twitterville – using Twitter to help a business thrive, and The Laws of Disruption – disruption technologies in the digital age.

Since the digital realm shows no signs of slowing down, or moving with caution, perhaps we as individuals should make more of an effort.



The Pink Ribbon: A Victim of “Cause Marketing”?

Let’s make a few things clear before we go any further with today’s post.

According to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, breast cancer accounts for one out of every three cancer diagnoses for women in the United States. This means nearly 200,000 American women will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year. It is the most common type of cancer among women and is a cancer that is second only to lung cancer in the number of women whose lives it claims each year. October, as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, helps to continue to raise awareness of this terrible disease that can strike any woman during the course of her life.

With that in mind, I was somewhat startled when I read this piece from the Boston Globe. If you read this piece, I beg you to please read the entire Boston Globe article, as it is essential that you get the full story before making assessments. The article discusses a very sensitive issue that will hit home with virtually anyone. However, it also brings up a number of interesting points about the link between consumer goods, charitable causes and the buying public. I’m sure I’m not alone in volunteering that I’ve often bought products emblazoned with the pink ribbon under the notion that a portion of my money would help one of any number of breast cancer charities. These are organizations that are desperately in need of financial support and if our purchases further their life-saving efforts, all the better for it. But as you’ll learn when you read the Globe’s story, the route from our pockets to the charity’s coffers has a variety of twists and turns and, in a few unfortunate cases, it terminates before the money arrives where we intend.

I could go on for pages about the difficulties involved in engaging in what the Globe piece refers to as “Cause Marketing.” The Globe article discusses the psychological impact of this marketing practice. It certainly led me to question myself. Are we so inundated with “pink” (particularly during October) that we begin to glaze over, losing sight of the vital importance of the cause? Have I ever offended someone suffering with breast cancer by sporting a pink ribbon? Does buying “pink” branded products make me feel like I’ve “done my part” and does it make me less likely to independently contribute to a breast cancer foundation?

Putting the individual aside for a moment, there is a crucial message here for businesses, as well. Business leaders should understand the overwhelming need for transparency when aligning their organizations with a charitable cause, particularly one like breast cancer that affects millions of people. James Champy, author of Inspire: Why Customers Come Back, has an excellent perspective on the need for openness on the part of the seller. When a colleague of mine interviewed Champy recently on the subject of marketing with a higher purpose, Champy gave a forthright answer about the need for authenticity.

“You have to be so pure that you’ve got to be willing to put everything you do out there so customers and the public can see what you do,” Champy said. He also noted that if a company violates the public trust, it will be forced to deal with the consequences, something that in today’s online world can potentially destroy a company.

If I’ve learned anything from both Champy’s insight and the Globe article, it’s that I absolutely WILL continue to purchase products that contribute to the search for a breast cancer cure. In addition, I may also cut out the middleman and send an additional donation directly to a worthy foundation.



Luxury Status at What Cost?

Part of producing each month’s edition of Soundview Executive Book Summaries involves recording and editing the audio version. While conversing with a colleague at a studio with whom we work, the subject of malls came up. My friend mentioned that he’s seen more than a few empty storefronts as he walked through one local mall.

By coincidence, I came across this interesting photo study from Time magazine today. It’s important to note that at least one of the photos included in this collection is of a set of stores that were abandoned decades ago. However, the remaining stores are all fairly recent closings.

I found the photo study while reading an article about hard times at clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch (A&F). If you have children, or attended college between 1996 and 2006, you’re probably intimately familiar with this company. As an editor, I love the way Time used the classic tactic of posing a question in its headline. Is A&F really the worst recession brand? We might want to cast a critical eye over other business sectors before we do too much picking on people who sell hooded sweatshirts and, as the Time article notes, $90 jeans.

Still, the central issue in the article that is most worthy of discussion is how companies that are perceived as luxury brands should handle tough times. I found the concept of price cutting to be of particular interest in this article. Theoretically, a luxury brand that cuts its price runs the risk of losing its status, but does this assumption apply during times of economic hardship? I agree with the marketing professor in the article who notes that if you keep your prices low for a period of time, you create an expectation among customers that they’ll stay that way.

What’s your take on how luxury brands should navigate a recession? Send me a comment and let me know your thoughts.



Trust and Responsibility

Hands up if you’ve used Wikipedia today. It looks like there’s one group that won’t be welcome to post on the site for awhile: the Church of Scientology. Now before everyone starts throwing out Tom Cruise jokes and South Park quotes (yes, I have teenagers, and yes, I’ve seen the Scientology episode), I’d prefer us to examine the heart of the issue. It’s something that will continue to increase in frequency as social media evolves and changes. I’m referring to trust. Wikipedia’s decision to block IP addresses that come from known Scientology sources is the result of the organization breaking one of the Web site’s major rules: posts must maintain neutrality. The Church of Scientology is alleged to have promoted its own agenda when making or editing posts on Wikipedia. The fact that this occurred on several occasions led the Web giant to take extreme action.

But what does this really mean to you and I? From the moment the words “Web site” entered our everyday parlance, they’ve come along with that famous grain of salt with which were supposed to take info gleaned from the online world. Wikipedia’s actions demonstrate a continued need for policing in those instances when trust is violated. It’s also interesting to note that this news arrives on the same day that President Obama announces the creation of a cyber security office in the White House. With the Web being a tool which we can no longer live without, we are as much a part of the trust equation as those with malicious intentions. Continued cooperation between Web site host and user will be necessary to ensure that there remain some places where we can possibly believe some of what we read.

Since we’re on the topic of trust, don’t forget to check out our next Soundview Live event with Stephen M.R. Covey, author of The Speed of Trust. Subscribers will have the opportunity to interact with Stephen beginning at 2:00 p.m. EST on Tuesday, June 9, 2009. If you’re not a subscriber, visit Summary.comto find out how you can join us on June 9th.



The Heart of Trust

I make it a point to always put my personal politics aside when I sit down to write this blog. But I’ll admit it can be difficult to come off non-partisan, even when writing about subjects that seem devoid of politics. Sometimes I’ll stumble across a headline that I think would make for decent material, like this one that I read today. Then, I think twice because I want this blog to be free of the arguments that clog up so many blogs and message boards.

So, let’s just say that one of the issues at the heart of the above story sparked me to write about trust. A quick title search, courtesy of our friends at Barnes & Noble, brings back more than 2,500 business books relating to the subject of ethics alone. The word “trust” generates more than 500 results. It’s such a delicate subject area in the realm of business. Unfortunately, it seems as though the public stands on one cliff, businesses stand on the opposite cliff, and a mighty chasm divides the two. Actually, it’s somewhat unfair to paint business with a broad brush. Even amongst individuals, the trust level hovers somewhere less than 50%.

Surprisingly, the U.S. is actually one of the more trusting nations in the world. Check out the findings of this social trust survey conducted by the Pew Research Center. There’s some interesting reading in this report, although, it mainly deals with person-to-person trust, not person-to-business. Either way, the financial industry certainly hasn’t done its best to aid consumer trust over the last several years.

One person who is an absolute expert on trust is author Stephen M.R. Covey. We’ve previously summarized his book The Speed of Trust. As he notes, trust is the one thing that changes everything. We’re pleased to announce that he’s about to bring his message of trust directly to our subscribers!

Stephen will be joining us on Tuesday, June 9 at 2:00 p.m. (EST) for our next edition of Soundview Live. Click here to learn more about Soundview Live and to see how you can sign up and join us for an hour of great conversation and insight. Stephen is a dynamic speaker and you’ll gain a lot from listening to this event. Trust me.