I don’t talk about Oracle.com much. In fact, I speak about them so little that one would be lead to believe that I hold a grudge against them. Sure, they unceremoniously erased one of the best enterprise systems sites from the Internet–Sun.com. But, I won’t hold that against them. No, I don’t write about them much for one reason:

My Mother taught me if you don’t have something nice to say about someone, don’t say anything at all.

There’s a litany of issues I have with Oracle.com ranging from design to innovation (or rather a lack thereof). But today, my rant is about Oracle.com’s content.

With communities and social networking becoming a requirement for IT Websites, product and service marketing content is becoming more focused on visitors’ needs. The prose tells them how the company’s products and services will solve their problems and help achieve their business goals. Some connect their technologies and benefits with real-world scenarios that visitors relate to. The best of the best even make it downright engaging to read.

The new message: “It’s all about you.”

Let’s compare this content approach to that on Oracle.com. A review of over twenty hardware and software product pages showed that Oracle’s name is mentioned a whopping 5 times more often than the words “you” or “yours” on a single page*. On some that number increased to over 10 to one. Combine that with page layouts that always begin with essays about “Why Oracle” and articles about its industry leadership, and you only get one message:

“It’s all about Oracle.”

But Oracle is not alone

HP.com also suffers from the “all about me” disease. HP.com’s ratios almost perfectly mirror Oracle.com’s. Product page content often mention HP five times more often than “you”. This increases to 10 to 1 on pages that provide lists of links to its products or related documents. HP.com does have one saving grace. Its page layouts mix up the content so it’s less obvious that HP is tooting its own horn.

The Bottom Line

The fact is people buy products because they have a problem that needs solved—not because the company is (or thinks it is) fabulous. Tout the product. Relate it to visitors’ needs. If they can understand this and it solves their problem, they will buy it.

What to avoid:

• Sentences that begin with the company name: if there is more than one, there is too many
• Listing the company name before actual product names: if visitors are on the company site, they know what company made the product.
• Topics that only speak about the company: this includes “Why [insert company name]?” content that runs more than 3 sentences.

How do the other enterprise systems sites fare?

IBM.com (software and hardware products) | The ratio of the usage of “IBM” to “you” or “yours” was a surprising 1:1 on many IBM Software page. In fact, on some pages the word “you” was used twice as much as “IBM”. IBM.com’s hardware product content does not fare quite as well with a ratio of 3 to 1.

Intel.com Business | The Intel.com site did not fare quite as well as IBM.com. On average Intel’s name was mentioned 3 times more often than the word “you”.

*Navigation panels were not included. Product names and links located in the body of the page were.

Did you hear that the blue jean giant The Gap announced a new logo? Yeah, it didn’t create a blip on my radar either. I work in the tech biz, and I don’t shop at The Gap.

But what did get my attention is how it’s re-branding effort bombed (and was subsequently pulled) solely based on the public outcry on social media outlets.

There are many blog posts and news outlets weighing in on The Gap’s misguided design decision, and the stunning influence social media can have on corporate decisions. Some blogs even present the intriguing (if not a bit far-fetched) hypothesis that The Gap’s social media strategy was actually an ingeniously crafted publicity stunt formulated to increase holiday sales and bolster waning stock performance.

So was the The Gap’s decision to announce its new logo using Facebook and Twitter a public gaffe or social coup? President of Gap Brand North America, Marka Hansen believes they “did not go about this the right way.” Sorry Ms. Hansen, I disagree. To my mind, it is proof positive that when a company employs social media properly—intentionally or accidentally—it strikes gold.

What did The Gap get right?

1. They published the announcement on two different social media outlets instead of one. This lets them “manage the message” by combining Facebook’s robust and flexible platform, with Twitter’s “cut to the chase” schema and vast reach. In social media, two forums are always better than one.
2. They have the opportunity to glean far more information than focus groups and studies can ever deliver. Their study sample is The Gap’s most loyal customers and company watchers. Its demographic is worldwide. The responses are genuine and unvarnished. Best of all—it’s virtually free. If The Gap’s number crunchers are smart, they’ll catalog responses that go beyond opinions about the logo. There is gold in them there hills.
3. They quickly responded to public feedback by pulling the new logo and publishing a press release focusing on how their customers influenced in their decision. The company has even offered customers to submit their own designs going forward. Nothing fosters customer loyalty more than showing they are valued.

What did they do wrong? From the tenor of Ms. Hansen’s latest press release, it would seem that The Gap and its branding agency weren’t emotionally ready for such overwhelmingly negative feedback. That’s about all.

Maybe the whole logo idea wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. Perhaps the overwhelmingly negative feedback was more than the folks at The Gap expected. But, their social media strategy was a resounding success. It was done with the right intentions—if not a bit fearlessly. It gave them the feedback they needed. They responded with all the right messages. And most importantly—in the face of negative feedback they didn’t pack their bags and head home. Instead, they are gearing up for round two by exploring new ways to harness the power of social media. Now that’s the way to run a social media strategy.

The other day, I was thinking about the latest social media snafu HP.com’s Networking zone recently ran into. Its experience is an important lesson about how dangerous displaying the musings, and sometimes wrath, of the masses can be. This led me to ponder: what questions do Website teams need to ask themselves before deciding to pipe social media content onto their Website pages? Off the top of my head, four major questions come to mind:

What is the objective? Why are you planning to use social media in the first place? This isn’t to say that your Web team shouldn’t consider social media; only that you need to ask yourself some tough questions before you start. Is it to encourage conversation with customers? Generate leads? Master the wisdom of crowds? Prove your company is “with it”? If the latter is the answer, you are going down a dangerous path. On the other hand, if you are really looking for people to tell you what they think, be careful what you wish for. Expect the worst and plan accordingly.

How complex is the topic? This is where choosing the right social media tool is critical. Complex topics require two important things—character space and smart moderators.

Esoteric and incendiary topics, such as strategies, direction statements, or defense of “good ideas gone bad,” require space for participants to fully present their opinions, and for smart moderators to manage the conversation. For these discussions, blogs, forums, and FaceBook provide the best formats.

On the other hand, highly-focused topics that mention a company’s home-runs, such as what customers like best about a certain product or overwhelmingly popular Website features – or link readers to an important article or press release — will require less space and moderation since the posts will naturally be largely positive. In these cases, Twitter is a relatively safe bet.

Who will man the ramparts? Choosing and training the right moderators is the deciding factor in the success or failure of any social media engagement. Although this seems like a no brainer, the Web is littered with endless examples of interns and part-timers being sent in to do a professional’s job.

Remember this. In any social media discussion, the company’s moderators are the voice of the company—in essence, the new PR team. They are on the front lines facing the unvarnished opinions of customers, journalists, investors, general crazies – and competitors who want to spoil the soup.

This complexity means that being a moderator is a tough, and often thankless, job. It is also why it’s critical that people with the right temperament, education, and training are managing any type of social media discussion. Unprepared moderators—or none at all—allow the masses to define the company’s reputation and value proposition. Good moderators protect the company’s brand.

What is the probable (not best case) outcome? Did a product have serious glitches? Did financial projections fall woefully short? Most companies will shy away from social media to manage these events. In reality, social media is actually the perfect opportunity to set the story straight. This is where the executives rally the troops, craft their best “This is our finest hour” speeches, and moderators steel themselves to manage the damage. Planning for the best possible outcome leaves moderators flatfooted. Planning for the most realistic (or even worst) outcome gives the company the opportunity to send the right message and turn the tide of public opinion.

The cost of being cool

Although these four questions are likely to spur a multitude of other issues, one thing is clear. Social media is dangerous, wild, and highly unpredictable. That’s what makes it “cool”.

But, chasing “cool” without preparing for the real world is a costly mistake. Like all things Web, social media requires the types of complicated planning and cross-organizational coordination that can suck the excitement out of a project.

On the other hand, not doing your homework is sure to lead to a social media presence that is a nightmare for your company to manage, and a public venue for the aggravated and aggrieved. When this happens, social media ends up as a “cool” strategy that is very “un-cool” indeed.

I was surprised at the IBM Software Group zone’s performance in our latest siteIQ evaluations. Once upon a time, this site ranked first among all enterprise software comers by virtue of its huge portfolio of content & features, and competitive usability scores.

Fade out two years later and the story is much different. This site dropped to third among the 5 enterprise software sites we study and stands in 11^th place on the siteIQ eBusiness Index. (You can download a free IBM Software Group scoring summary here).

Today, CA.com and Oracle.com are the sites to watch. Between the two, I vote for CA.com. Beyond some stabs at Web 2.0 behaviors, Oracle.com’s design and content needle hasn’t moved a whit over the past two years. CA.com, on the other hand, recently launched a brand new site with a blizzard of bells and whistles. It’s worth a tour to see the site’s highly efficient product marketing click streams.

There are many reasons for IBM Software Group’s slide down the rankings. For starters, industry marketing ranks last among competitors; CA.com hands it its head in services marketing; and search features are inadequate to the task (ranks fourth).

And what does the IBM Software Group site do well? At the top of the list is the site’s integrated support portal, which is the best in the business, hands down. This site also has the best call to action behaviors in the form of consistent and persistent contact modules on almost every page. Generally, the site’s usability performs in the Good Practice range.

The Bottom Line

The IBM Software Group site does a yeoman’s job of organizing and presenting its massive portfolio of software products and related offerings, but seems to have missed the memos on Web 2.0, Web 3.0, and social media behaviors that define best-in-class Websites.  It is a perfectly serviceable site circa 2008 — but offers little inspiration for Web teams trying to push on the design and social media envelopes.

Evaluation Criteria: 1,177 types of content, features & capabilities; 119 usability metrics

Related Report: 2010 Enterprise Software Website Rankings

Real people, real voices, real time

While the SMB & mid-size market are using social media to just get their name out to the masses, large companies are learning how to use social media & communities in tandem for a whole new purpose. And it is literally changing the face of IT.

Large IT companies don’t need to get their name out there. I mean, who doesn’t know IBM, HP, Apple, or Dell? I would bet that even your grandmother knows the name of one of these companies, even if she doesn’t know how to use a mouse. So, aside from using social media as a slick press release system, how do large companies use these outlets to their advantage?

The death of the faceless organization: For eons IBM has had the reputation of the faceless organization. In fact, it became so faceless that the phrase “blue suits” was coined to describe it. Well, those days are over—welcome the people that are IBM. Over the past 12 months, IBM.com has started publishing the names & faces of the managers & executives who steer IBM—the company, the vision, and the products.  This initiative is supported by its online communities, Facebook pages, and Twitter personas. Now IBM customers & fans can engage with IBMers real time, and hear the perspectives of IBM employees on an ongoing basis. Now IBM has many, many faces & voices—and many of them wear golf shirts.

What goes around comes around: Large companies are made of people, and people want to hear what others are saying about them. This is where the social networking part of the equation comes into play. Forums like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter offer companies a view into the opinions, wants, and needs of its potential buyers and customers like never before. Just type IBM, HP, Dell, or Apple into the Facebook search engine and see how many pages show up. Or cruise these Websites for links back to their Facebook pages or Twitter profiles. These companies are learning that these forums are more than places to meet & greet. They are the largest-scale, lowest-cost testing forums and CSAT studies they could ever want.

To err is human to deliver spin control divine: Strategies that didn’t pan out. Products that don’t cut the mustard. Far reaching visions that never came to fruition. All the major companies have them, only now social media gives them the platforms to take wrong turns into new directions. Executives use blogs, Webcasts, and Podcasts to subtly shift their company’s visions to accommodate an ever changing business landscape. Meanwhile, product managers use blogs & forums to announce “new & improved features” (or in other words, “fixes for glitches”) in an upcoming product update—or in the worst of cases, fall on their swords. But no matter the topic, issue, or intent, all these social mediums give companies the flexibility to shift, craft, and hone their visions and image to align to current realities.

What do all of these strategies have in common? The power that social media gives people to change a company’s image, direction, and products—whether it is the company’s executives, product managers, customers, or prospects. The benefits of these strategies & forums are not limited to only the mighty few. Any company that is willing to use social media to open a dialog and listen to what people say can become the flexible and responsive organization that potential buyers and customers crave.

One of the things Web teams constantly struggle with is the ying and yang between centralized governance and the wants, needs, and demands of stakeholders and line of business (LOB) managers who operate different parts of the site.

Over the past few years, I’ve seen these dynamics play out many companies – and in different ways. The most memorable are:

The inmates run the asylum

Here, I’m reminded of a huge software company who belatedly realized that competitors were selling their low cost software online – and they needed to get with the program.

To achieve this, the dotcom team spent weeks confabing with line of business marketing managers and stakeholders to get their buy in and identify requirements. Then they consolidated the feedback and developed a working project plan.

Three months later, the dotcom team was ready to launch the company’s first foray into ecommerce. The platform was built. LOB marketing managers were trained. Then everything went off the rails.

Why? Because the most influential LOB pulled its support for ecommerce at the last minute. I was in the room when the project manager got the call – and then watched her bang her head on the conference room table as the ecommerce strategy (and all of the hard work) went down the tubes.

And what’s the lesson? Websites don’t do well in a matrix management organization where one “no” vote can stop the presses. If you have one, make sure that LOB executives are driving the strategy down through the troops. They won’t salute you – but they sure will salute their bosses.

The vision hits the “what’s in it for me?” brick wall

Here, I’m reminded of a huge computer company that has decided to embrace social media whole hog and use it as a competitive game changer. New, smart executives were hired to develop and evangelize a strategy based on the future of the Web. Minions were added to execute the vision and gain buy in from the troops working in every line of business.

The problem? The strategy requires two things. A cult like belief in a fuzzy future and a fundamental change in the company’s culture – including increasing the load on beleaguered marketing managers who are already up to their eyeballs in management fire drills — and are measured based on revenue generation.

Thus, the grand strategy devised in one corner of the corporation collides with the beliefs & business realities everywhere else.  The net result is plenty of “do you get it? I don’t” whispers around the water cooler, and push back from LOB executives who can’t see how this foray into the great unknown will improve their bottom line.

And what’s the lesson? Grand visions – especially those that can’t be linked to revenue — don’t translate well in large, complex organizations. As important, if the vision requires a fundamental culture change, you are probably throwing yourself against a brick wall.

The Bottom Line

After working with major corporations for 15 years, I know the following things about the Web:

1. Visions and strategies that can’t generate revenue are doomed to fail. As important, if it can’t be measured, it doesn’t exist. After a grace period, expect executives to pull the plug.
2. Web strategies that rely on a culture change will end up on the cutting room floor. This is especially true in today’s business climate where layoffs mean people have to do two or more jobs. If your strategy relies on culture change, put it on the back burner for at least 3 years.
3. Bold promises aside, the jury’s still out on whether social media is a passing (and very expensive) fad —  or a new era on the Web. Lots of companies (like the example above) think it’s a game changer. The rest can’t quite figure out what all of this lurking and listening means for the bottom line. My POV? Tread carefully and spend wisely. Bet that the future of social media is captured in item #1 above.

In case you haven’t noticed, CA.com recently launched a new site. As is our custom, we’ve delayed our deep-drive about six weeks to let the CA.com team find snafus and work out the bugs. Now it’s time to put the site through its paces. Here’s our Cliff’s Notes analysis: (siteIQ clients can read the complete analysis here. (log in required)

Pros

CA.com has retained its product marketing “snacking architecture,” which is one of the most powerful in the business. If you haven’t seen this in action, pick any CA product and follow the bouncing ball.

CA.com is one of few sites that know how to craft marketing content as a set of questions that speak to visitor objectives. If you need inspiration, CA.com is the place to start.

CA.com’s new design is consistent across the site; not many page owners missed the memo. CA.com is yet another example of the iterative design strategy we discussed in a recent post.

CA.com makes great use of tab-top organization on its product level pages (shades of Sun.com, yikes!). Overall, a tab-top tour de force.

Neutral

CA.com’s play on mega-menus brings it into the fold, but these menus are much less impressive than those deployed by Cisco.com and Juniper.net. Close, but no cigar.

Cons

CA.com just couldn’t resist the “eye candy” factor on its home page. In this case, it’s those revolving boxes that use type fonts that are a Mr. Magoo moment at any screen size – and whirl at the drop of a hat. Here, CA.com gets a B+ for visual impact – and D- for usability and relevance.

CA.com got hijacked on its way to the Web.2.0 ball. Although most videos are easily accessible, CA.com wraps its badly aging “On Demand” Webinars in draconian registration and access processes that will deter all but the most intrepid visitors. Let’s just say that CA.com gets a D- for its “on demand” promise.

This site pops more windows than a high rise in a hurricane. Most links pop a window without warning which, in turn, requires the visitor to stumble through their browser tabs to find the starting gate. Overall, a messy process and a very fractured experience.

Finally, no tour is complete without stepping through CA.com’s communities experience.  CA.com’s support-related communities are easily accessible and appear to be full of lively dialogs. Business communities? Not so much.

One reason might be the tortuous path visitors must take, which includes wading through an over-engineered “Second Life”-style destination packed with a talking head, downloadable brochures, and a link to the target community. Given the obstacles visitors must endure, it’s no surprise that CA.com’s fledgling business communities are the size of a newt (largest population is currently 42 members).

The Bottom Line

The new CA.com is a pretty new face that missed the memos on how to capitalize on Web 2.0 and social media marketing. Smart companies will study CA.com’s best-in-class product marketing click streams, and leave the rest to the marketing muses.

Ok, I need to come clean. Until recently, I haven’t really gotten my head around the whole “social media for business” thing.

It’s not that I don’t understand what Twitter, FaceBook, YouTube and the rest of the social media gang do. I get it.  It’s just that social media has always seemed to be more of a time consuming distraction than a tool that gives businesses any kind of inside edge.

The light dawned when I was writing our new report about how companies can build Websites optimized around the B2B buying process. In case you don’t know, that’s the 17 step process your biggest customers go through to make a buying decision.

As it turns out, social media plays a huge role in this process – but not where you might think. If you think about the process in three major chunks – make the “long list” – make the “short list” – and make it through the vetting process – social media plays its most important role in part one — making the “long list”.  If you don’t make the cut here, participating in the “short list” and the vetting processes won’t be a problem.

So what roles do social media play in this part of the process? Let me count the ways.

• Social media will give you visibility with buyers who are blissfully unaware of your company and its products.
• Lets them tune in to what current customers and the market are saying so they can add you to (or strike you from) the list — and
• Perhaps as important, social media is the way buyers can monitor your company throughout the decision process. If things go wrong on the social Web, you’re likely to end up on the “short list” cutting room floor.

In other words, social media is all about creating visibility and managing market perceptions when it really counts.

Here’s a short podcast about the complex B2B buying process – and the roles social media – and your Website – play in this process. Think of it as a Cliff’s Notes battle plan to woo and win those big deals.

[powerpress]

I can remember when flash mobs were a hot topic in the media; essentially a group of people with more time on their hands than good sense. I figured this phenomenon would go the way of the mosh pit.

Who knew that Dell.com would try and harness it as a form of online community behavior?

Here, I’m talking about Dell.com’s Storm Sessions which nestle within its Idea Storm community. In simple terms, this is the place where Dell throws out an idea or question for community members, starts the clock, and lets community members throw in their opinions.

Gabfests can be open for a month or a few days. Once the clock has run out, the session is closed, Dell reviews the comments, and shares how/when Dell will act on the information.

I’ve been watching Storm Sessions for about six months to see if this idea would gain any traction within Dell’s community ecosystem and gauge the kinds of issues and questions Dell would pose.

From one perspective, I’m cautiously impressed. Topics range from how to improve the site’s support zones, to mobile technologies desires, to if and how Dell’s corporate responsibility behaviors influence purchase decisions. In other words, information that most technology companies need to know.

Member participation?  Not so impressed. Generally, less than 20 members weigh in with opinions—which doesn’t even represent a rounding error when Dell’s massive community population is added up.

This light user footprint underscores the community behaviors we see across the IT Web. Most conversations are happening in support and developer forums. When the conversation turns to business topics, most members would rather lurk and listen – which doesn’t do much when you are trying to spark a dialog.

Despite these realities I wouldn’t count this idea out.  Digital flash mobs could be a very powerful way to spark conversations within technical communities and, if handled properly, deliver a wealth of next generation product insights. They also allow a company to “cap” the conversation, distill the results into essential points, and feed back results to the whole community.

From this perspective, don’t think of them as “flash mobs” with a purpose. Think of them as flash research that can pay huge dividends.

I’ve been doing deep dives into some communities on the Web and have decided that many of them are time bombs waiting to go off in companies.

To see why, let me take you on a quick trip down memory lane.

In a previous life, I was a strategic consultant to major IT companies – and once found myself presenting to Wang Lab’s Board of Directors. The topic of the day was customer satisfaction. A cadre of VPs were telling Dr. Wang that customers loved the company. Our customer satisfaction surveys showed that the peasants were getting ready to storm the castle, pitch forks and all.

Wang’s solution to the problem was simple. The company’s engineers and support staffs were mobilized to visit all of Wang’s major customers, chat up product benefits, and listen to their needs. Six weeks later, the company had to sponsor a series of mandatory classes to teach its technical staff how to talk to customers, and wear a suit and tie. Customer satisfaction never improved — and the end game is now industry lore.

Fade out a couple of decades later and we have the same situations brewing in digital form. To see why, consider a couple of examples I ran across the other day.

In one case, a customer posted a comment that he was very unhappy with a particular product and was going to defect to a competitor. The response from the moderator? “I’m sorry you feel that way. You’ll be back though. Their product is as bad as ours.”

Or consider what is happening in the D-Link forums, where customers are threatening to form a class action lawsuit and telling prospective buyers to run away. The company’s reaction?  A great deal of silence punctuated by moderators hurling insults at angry users. If that’s not a pitchfork moment, I don’t know what is.

This brings me to the salient point. Operating any community without an army of well-trained moderators is a great way to destroy your brand. Once upon a time, companies thought they could stem the tide with some sartorial splendor. Today, even more damage can be done with a pair of fuzzy slippers and a laptop at home.