Bagel Tuesday - Fresh ideas. Toasted opinions.

When it comes to their websites, not very—yet.

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. 

The debate about the decline of the written word has been going on for a long time now.  Recently, however, there seems to be a renewed interest in the topic.  

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).

A study by Competitrack, an advertising tracking firm that began tracking print ads using QR codes in 2011, revealed that financial services has been making extensive use of this technology: 6.7% of all QR code activity, third following retail (21.9%) and technology (13.6%).[1] This is notable, as the financial services industry is generally not an early adapter to new technologies.

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

There's a bakery in our neighborhood that — like many businesses in New York — puts up a temporary vestibule to keep the winter winds out. It's easy to get in: pull the handle to a flimsy fabric-and-aluminum door, take two steps and open a glass door.

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.")

This story about a new Las Vegas hotel got a lot of mileage last week on Facebook, Twitter and the blogosphere. In case you missed it, guests lounging at the pool at the Vdara hotel

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.

There's a phenomenal series running in the Wall Street Journal about digital privacy (or the lack thereof) called What They Know, which found that:

...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.

Remember in 2006 when Time Magazine named "You" as the Person of the Year? This was perhaps the tipping point for the phenomenon known as user–generated content. "You" earned this honor:

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.

I just couldn’t imagine that anyone on Facebook would want their string of friends’ musings, vacation pictures and wry comments interrupted by an asset manager’s thoughts on the strength of the euro. Could you?

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.

Continue Reading