We noticed last week that Royce Funds launched a new website using responsive design. By our count, it’s only the second responsive asset management site. We surveyed 70 corporate sites earlier this year, and only Delaware Investments was responsive at the time. 

Responsive design, if you haven’t heard, is a way of coding a site so it responds to the size of your browser window. Whether your visitor is using a desktop computer, laptop, tablet or smartphone, a responsive website will automatically change its layout to deliver the right information, in the right format.

It’s been all the rage in geek circles since it was introduced two years ago. Based on the great job done by Delaware and Royce, and conversations we’ve been having with other asset managers, we think you’ll be seeing lots more of them very shortly. 

If you haven’t seen it, it’s fast becoming an Internet viral sensation.   The agony of defeat has always gathered a lot of media interest, but the popularity of this incident reminds me of one of the six key qualities I recently read in Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die.

It’s the unexpectedness factor, which essentially states that in order to get people to pay attention to our ideas and maintain interest, we need to violate their expectations.  And that’s exactly what Stephan Feck did when he landed on his back.  No one expects an Olympic athlete to miss the mark this badly.  Yes, some people revel in seeing others fail, but for most (at least what I like to think) it’s more a matter of interest and curiosity that’s generated by surprise and unexpectedness.

In Made to Stick, the Heath brothers also point out that we can use surprise to grab people’s attention, but it generally won’t last.  For an idea or event to endure, we must generate interest and curiosity.  “How do you keep students engaged during the forty-eighth history class of the year?  We engage people’s curiosity over a long period of time by systematically “opening gaps” in their knowledge—and then filling those gaps.”

They use a great example of the Nordstrom employee who cheerfully gift wrapped products a customer bought at Macy’s.  The story provides the first step in replacing employees' ideas of good service and common sense with the Nordstrom way of “uncommon sense.”

No one wants to be Stephan Feck, but there is a lesson to be learned.  Hopefully he’ll figure out what it is too.

Photo credit: NBC

Here’s a short list: 

“Let’s Get Visual: Marketing in a post-text world”

“People Don’t Read Anymore”

“Cisco: By 2013 Video Will Be 90 Percent of All Consumer IP Traffic and 64 Percent of Mobile”

“Steve Jobs: ‘People Don’t Read Anymore’”

And my favorite from The Onion: 

“National Essay Writing Contest Now Accepting Video Submissions”

You get the sense from these stories that not only is the written word in decline, but it will be extinct by 2030. 

Given the topic, I’m not going to drone on about the decline of the written word or give reasons for hope and optimism about the future of prose.

Instead, I just want to make a simple observation.  All of these authors don’t seem to recognize the inherent challenges, inefficiencies and sometimes ineffectiveness of a purely visual approach to producing certain types of content for different audiences.  I can appreciate an author’s naiveté or unwillingness to look beyond his or her own businesses, markets or expertise.  I do the same thing.  Given the amount of recent focus on the topic, however, I feel compelled to respond.

Also, I’m not talking about isolated industries or topics, such as investments (my bias).  I can think of a number of industries or topics where it’s not recommended and, most likely, ineffective to create a video, animation of other multimedia experience.  A few examples:

• “Animating synthetic dyadic conversation with variations based on context and agent attributes.” (From the Journal of Visualization and Computer Animation – I couldn’t find a video version of the paper.)

• “Currency Returns and Hedging Decisions”

• “Understanding Low Volatility Strategies: Minimum Variance”

• “Compliance Issues Affecting Structured Products”

I love these:

• “LIM Protein Direct Brainstem Axon Trajectories”

• “The Relation of Diagonal Ear Lobe Crease to the Presence, Extent and Severity of Coronary Artery Disease…”  The title continues, but you get the point.

I guess the question comes down to this, if you’re the type of person who's interested in these topics, would you rather watch the video?  Maybe, but more importantly, if you’re in charge of marketing this content, what makes the most sense from a business and strategic standpoint?  I’d be reluctant to recommend a video or other visual elements, beyond the graphics needed to illustrate the data for this type of content.

Maybe I’m preaching to the choir here, but hopefully you see my point.  The written word is never going away, at least not in our lifetime.  Markets may continue to fragment in a way that we can’t conceive of today.  And while this means the mass market for in-depth, academic insight and research may diminish, there will always be a need for concise, clear, humorous, articulate, etc. prose.  Without it, it’s tough to write the script.  Unless, of course, you’re watching YouTube (script optional).

Joe writes, “Today, a blog is just a ticket to the ball game. 65% of B2B companies have blogs today (according to CMI and MarketingProfs research). In order to be the leading expert for your industry, you need to take story ideas and adapt them to channels, like blowing a dandelion in the wind. For example, with the Content Marketing Playbook, although the eBook was the main content product, we produced a SlideShare version, multiple podcasts, multiple blog posts, a news release, an e-newsletter version, snippets in our print magazine, guest blogs, promotions on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, and more.”

While I agree with just about every point Joe makes, he also points out that you should “know your niche,” know your audiences,” “know your budget” and “know your metrics.” 

If you’re paying attention to all these things then ideally you have a well-defined audience with specific needs and objectives, and like most businesses your resources are limited. As a result, maybe a print version that’s promoted on LinkedIn is the best approach.  Maybe only a SlideShare version makes sense.  My point is, content marketing doesn’t always require adapting to numerous channels.

Maybe Joe isn’t suggesting that you should always repurpose content to multiple channels, “like blowing a dandelion in the wind,” but I got the impression he is.

His post left me thinking that just like the everything bagel, when it comes to content marketing, our tendency is to want it all.  Since we can’t always be certain how our audiences will prefer to consume content, with so many options available, let’s throw everything out there and see what sticks.

I would argue that sometimes the plain bagel tastes just as good. As long as it's from Ess-a-Bagel.

Competitrack listed the top 30 companies using QR codes in their print advertising: OppenheimerFunds ranked number one (85%); State Street, number four (61%); Aetna, number eight (33%); American Express, number 13 (21%); and Chase, number 18 (15%).1 According to Competitrack, more than three out of every five print ads run by OppenheimerFunds and State Street in 2011 featured QR codes.

Martha Willis, CMO, OppenheimerFunds, said that the QR codes drive people to GlobalizeYourThinking.com, a site that delivers “snackable” content to advisors who can then send it to their clients, including white papers, investment ideas and multimedia. So instead of handing out brochures, advisors can “share these little streaming infomercials.”[2]

With this program, OppenheimerFunds received the kind of exposure—20,000 video downloads overall, QR code directly responsible for 1,000 views in 2½ months—that “would have taken [them] 20 years using the in-person model.”2

Willis draws attention to the fact that by embracing new technologies, advisors and asset managers project an image of being on the cutting edge. Using outdated modes of communication can be harmful to a brand. Asset managers should make confident use of technology and trends. 

Another example of incorporating QR codes into a marketing strategy is Emerald’s QRConnect program. Emerald is a company that provides financial advisors with turnkey seminar systems, websites, newsletters and other marketing materials. For its newsletter and website clients, a QR code is placed on the front of each newsletter. When the end clients scan it, they are brought to additional content hosted on the participating advisor’s website.[3] This encourages the client to visit the entire advisor site and provides a touch point, efficiently and cheaply.

The recent study from Competitrack and Emerald’s early adoption suggest a shift in the industry’s historically skeptical view of new technology and nontraditional marketing approaches.

[1] Competitrack, “Black White, and Read All Over,” 2012. (http://www.competitrack.com/nhpub/2dcodes/index.html)

[2] B2B, “Close-Up with Martha Willis, CMO, OppenheimerFunds,” March 30, 2011. 

[3] www.emeraldconnect.com/qr

You can use Twitter as a micro-broadcasting medium.

It doesn't need to sound like a perky, helpful friend.

It doesn't need to be a conversation.

Most social media "experts" are contemplating retail brands and individuals, not the compliance-rich, institutional, intermediary-sale world that most of us inhabit. Do you really think an institutional consultant would mind the simple tweets "Q4 performance for our Small Cap fund is now posted" or "Joanne Smith thinks Latam is overlooked and undervalued", each with a link to the website? 

I hear a lot of trepidation from asset and wealth managers about getting into Twitter. But I don't think it needs to be that complicated. Of course it'd be nice to have great company personalities tweeting from company-related individual accounts, but simply posting announcements when you can is better than a void. It provides clients with another way of getting the information they need, increases your SEO, and starts giving you the experience you need to hone a strategy that makes sense for your company.

But getting out of this particular vestibule stymies people. There's no clear cue showing which of the three walls is the door. I've seen people hesitate, look confused, push against the walls — one guy even did a full mime-feeling-an-invisible-wall routine.

As I watch these trapped people, I'm inevitably reminded of issues that arise in web design:

• Navigation obviously takes more than casual use to learn. (Every customer entered through the vestibule minutes before attempting to leave it).
• Users don't want to try and fail. (They could quickly press each of the three walls to find the door but many don't.)
• Frustration happens in seconds.
• Clear messaging is a must for navigation. (A simple solution, like putting an "Exit" sticker at eye level, or adding a traditional door handle, would probably work well. The equivalent on a website would be to name a section "About us" instead of "Ingenuity.")

As the WSJ describes it:

It’s clever and a bit meta and, we’re best off not describing it anymore, but just linking to it, here.

Everyone talks about being different, but Manatt worked with us to creatively push their holiday message to a place that many firms would have shied away from. This kind of collaboration is something to look forward to in 2011.

reportedly are getting burned by concentrated sun rays strong enough to melt plastic drink cups and plastic newspaper bags.

Obviously, the big story here is cost-cutting. Had the Vdara Hotel spent more money on a reflective film for sun-facing windows, the "death-ray" wouldn't exist. But an underlying issue is putting a priority on form, rather than function. The building's placement in the path of the sun, and the concave facade, combined to produce the death-ray effect. So even though the design is aesthetically pleasing, the hotel has an ugly usability problem: a swimming pool area that is more of a danger than a luxury.

It's a funny story. But there's also a valuable lesson here. We've learned, particularly on digital projects, that a great design is wasted if the application doesn't work. As Barack Obama might say, that's just putting lipstick on a pig. But the point is that design decisions have real-world consequences, whether you're talking about a digital space, brick-and-mortar or, in this case, glass and steel.

The subject was "what advisors do online," based on new research by kasina. In my presentation, I supplemented the kasina research with some tips for asset managers in making the shift from a "dot.com-centric world" to the "content-centric world" we're in now, where users no longer reach your content only through your home page but access it directly from a constantly changing landscape of search engines, email links, blogs, social media, RSS readers, mobile apps, content aggregators and more. I also used our new AAM site (which just happened to launch that morning) as an example of how asset managers can make their content one of the main pillars of their value proposition.

You can see the whole webcast below (it lasts about an hour). I also plan to discuss this idea of the content-centric world some more in a future post.

...the tracking of consumers has grown both far more pervasive and far more intrusive than is realized by all but a handful of people in the vanguard of the industry.

Today's article is about the extensive information some websites have about you even before you tell them anything: "On the Web's Cutting Edge, Anonymity in Name Only." It's pretty powerful stuff -- or alarming, depending on your point of view. Previous articles explored the range of tracking technologies (the Journal calls it "spying") installed on your computer by popular websites, and how Microsoft chose not to include strict privacy features in its latest version of Internet Explorer.

It also includes some nifty interactive features like this Tracker Scorecard showing which sites use which tracking technologies. It turns out that dictionary.com, of all places, is the worst privacy offender of the 50 most popular U.S. websites.

Everyone who browses the Web (which is to say, everyone) should know about this. It's outside the Journal's firewall so you don't need a subscription.

"unconstitutionally vague, creating a chilling effect that goes far beyond the fleeting expletives at issue here."

While this is mostly a safeguard for broadcast networks to avoid getting sued for "spontaneous vulgarity" - like Bono's f-bomb and the infamous Janet Jackson incident, there's a larger point to be made here. Traditional broadcast media are adapting to the changing times, by simply treating consumers like adults. Don't like the foul language? Switch to another channel. Worried that your kids saw some partial nudity? Explain it to them.

And, of course, the Internet has been doing this for years. The best thing about the digital world is that a user can find absolutely anything - which is also the worst thing. But somehow we've all managed to navigate the space without a rating system, censorship, warning labels, or ten-second delays.

This is not to suggest that there isn't a lot of scary, inappropriate content on the Web. There is. But even the much talked about "internet kill switch" can't make it go away. What the Internet has taught us, and hopefully traditional media has finally learned, is that people are generally mature enough to find material that's appropriate for them, without needing a nanny to shield them from what's not. Because ultimately, the reward outweighs the risk.

for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game.

Nobody talks about user-generated content much anymore, maybe because of how ubiquitous it's become. A search for "most popular websites" brings back the usual suspects: social networking (Facebook and Twitter), publishing (Blogger and WordPress), as well as YouTube, Wikipedia, Flickr, Craigslist – all powered by user uploads and comments.

Maybe it began when Amazon started taking comments. Or maybe it goes back to the dawn of... reality television? Bear with me. Because what is user-generated content, if not audience participation? And in the years preceding the Time article, TV executives realized that they could lower their production costs, without the risk of Seinfeld-ian salary demands, with user-generated character development and drama.

But if reality TV teaches us anything, it's that the pros haven't really been beaten at their own game. They adapt. From B-listers on VH1 recapturing lost glories, to pop singers making guest appearances on American Idol, to Donald Trump himself, television still runs on star power.

And so it is with the digital world. The outdated notion of a blogger sitting in pajamas in the basement has been replaced by Huffington Post and The Atlantic. Ashton Kutcher has led a celebrity stampede on Twitter. And as Mark points out, the pros are making their way onto Facebook as well.

What are the implications of this? The fact is that "You" still control your brand's destiny on the Web. Don't concede the space to users, whether in pajamas or not. Adapt. Be a pro.

But Apple's foray into mobile advertising scares the daylights out of me.

I love Apple because their products put the user experience first. But when Apple starts selling ad space, it has to put the advertiser first. For me, that's a huge conflict of interest.

Want an ad-free experience on your iPhone or iPad? Good luck. Think Apple will allow ad-blocking software for mobile Safari? Yeah, right.

The simple truth is: Ads degrade the user experience. Yes, I understand all the arguments why they're are a good thing (or at least a necessary evil). Since users won't pay for content, ads are the price we have to pay for all this great free stuff on the Internet. Heck, I'm in a branch of the ad business myself.

But that doesn't mean I have to like the onslaught of advertising messages that intrude in our daily lives. And now the company that maintains an iron grip on my mobile Internet experience has identified advertising as an important new revenue stream.

Here's what I want to know: When push comes to shove, will Apple come down on the user's side or the advertiser's? I used to feel confident that Apple was on my side: protecting my user experience. Now I'm not so sure anymore.

Surprise. Asset managers are not only attracting a number of fans “likes” — 2,198 people “like” PIMCO on Facebook — but actual conversations are emerging.

Now I see that, when done right, any company can insert itself almost seamlessly into your Facebook flow.

From there, it’s not too hard to picture an asset manager on the retail end of things getting some conversations started…

But institutional die-hards PIMCO?

I salute their vision. Who knew that enough people on Facebook would want to think about something greater than matching pop icons to their yearbook quotes? It makes me like Facebook more — not only as a marketer, but as a user. It might still be bar conversation but the establishment just got a little more upscale.

Enter the doppelganger.

The new “community” pages on Facebook are created by an algorithm that searches for “topics and experiences” being discussed on Facebook. Yoga has a page. Wichita, Kansas has a page but it’s not as popular as yoga. Even Satan has a page but he’s not as popular as yoga or Wichita.

The algorithm is pretty smart. It will pull an image (an aerial shot of Wichita, a nice headshot of Kurt Vonnegut), a description from Wikipedia, and comments from Facebook about the subject. The geek in me loves this data reef organically emerging. But if I were Putnam Investments I might not be so enthusiastic.

When I started my survey of asset managers on social networks in March, Putnam’s Facebook page came up quickly in a Facebook search.

Obviously they had put some work into it.

But in May, a Facebook search yielded this result:

Which leads to this:

Putnam’s neatly planned and manicured Facebook page still exists, but a slightly woolier and certainly less predictable cousin has leaped in front of anyone who doesn’t already officially “like” Putnam. Not a very nice “thank you for shopping Facebook, Corporate America,” if you ask me.

I predict that Facebook will fix this and at least turn the roadsigns back in the logical direction of the most-liked pages. Then the early adopters can regain control of their Facebook conversation. But what about those companies who are hesitating to jump into the social media pool? Just take a look at the default Goldman Sachs’ page.

The conversation’s been going on for a while. Except now there’s a nice, branded room to have it in. What’s a company to do? I think that for the moment, there’s no fighting the tide. It might be time to jump in and swim.

The table after the jump shows the results of my survey completed mainly throughout March 2010.

Asset managers are taking varying approaches to using social media so there was room for interpretation. For instance, I didn’t count Wells Fargo’s Stagecoach Island Facebook page (too retail) but I did count Amerprise’s YouTube channel as a promotion of RiverSource (they feature RiverSource portfolio managers). Also, it’s not always certain that a custom Facebook page is officially sanctioned by the company.

Things are changing quickly. When I started the survey, it was pretty clear who was making an effort on Facebook, even to simply put up a page for employees. But in the last month or so, Facebook’s new “community” pages have pushed a lot of these private fan pages out of the search results. I had half a dozen in March and can only find one now.

Even more interesting, community pages have given almost every big company a seemingly official Facebook presence — whether they wanted one or not. A Facebook presence that is out of their control. More on this in my next posting.

The table after the jump shows an industry whose use of social media is very much in flux but progressing toward acceptance of it. You can click on the bullets to see how each tool is used. (NOTE: the Twitter column was updated as of July 23, 2010.)

Blog

Twitter account - active

Twitter account - inactive or of dubious authenticity

Facebook - company-generated public page with some activity

Facebook - private page and/or for employees only

You Tube - company-generated channel

BRAND	BLOG	TWITTER	FACEBOOK	YOU TUBE
Acadian Asset Management
AllianceBernstein
American Century
American Funds
Ariel Funds
BlackRock
BNY Mellon
Calvert
Capital Guardian
Columbia Management Group
Dimensional Fund Advisors
Dodge & Cox
Dreyfus
DWS
Eaton Vance
Evergreen Investments
Evermore Global
Federated
Fidelity
Fisher Investments
Franklin Templeton
Fremont Group
GAMCO Investors
Harbert Management
HarbourVest
The Hartford
Invesco AIM
Invesco PowerShares
iShares
J. & W. Seligman & Co.
Janus
Jefferson National
JP Morgan Funds
Knight Vinke
Legg Mason
MFS
Neuberger Berman
New York Life Investment Mgt
Northern Trust Investments
Nuveen Investments
PIMCO
PineBridge Investments
Pioneer Investments
Prudential Financial
Putnam Investments
Riversource Investments
Russell Investments
Sageview Capital
Sentinel Investments
State Street Global Advisors
TIAA-CREF
T. Rowe Price
TCW
UBS Global Asset Management
Vanguard
Wells Fargo Advantage Funds