We had a great launch on the second phase of a large-scale project (mostly rebuilding their entire back-end) for Vantel Pearls. Their home-grown content management system and e-commerce solution gives them a huge opportunity to utilize their nationwide network as both an online and offline revenue generator.

This is an important step for not only Vantel Pearls, but for other Direct Selling companies as they move from party or distributed services models to the online world in hopes of adding revenue from their field sales force.

The press release may be read on the Visual Activity news section, or you can visit the Vantel Pearls main Web site.

I need to post. It’s been a while since the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT has given me something that I can use/understand in layman’s terms.

In an effort to understand video clutter, the department has responded in the form of a clutter detector tool that can be used by anyone (yes, all five people) using MATLAB, and may be downloaded on the DSpace Web Site.

This early tool has the ability to stretch into other more simplified versions which can be built in mainstream application environments to help us run through pre-delivery and testing as we design and develop complicated user interfaces. Most notably, the theory is what makes the case, not the actual tool.

The challenge: develop a similar mainstream tool built in a ubiquitous player/reader that can become a standard testing software application for UX and Design consultancies.

Some e-mail marketing campaigns being sent these days are being sent by, as my friend Ethan Marcotte would say, SPAM Cannons. He would be right.

The traditional e-mail marketing methods are still in practice and they still get clicks if you design and develop them correctly.

Don’t Spray It

Creating one e-mail with many calls to action is probably not the best method if you are following the latest trend of personalization in e-mail marketing (and, to be honest, all online marketing). Rather, it’s nice to know that the content is being delivered to you because you’ve shown a genuine interest in a product or service.

With the degree of competition and the level of frequency with which we all receive electronic marketing, there should at least be an effort in keeping the message clear and quick.

Target

In a smaller organization, it’s even more important to target the correct audience for an e-mail campaign (there’s more revenue riding on it). Start out by selecting the list of people who have joined via the Web site. They will be your first line of communication. They’re also more likely to get involved in a word-of-mouth campaign once they receive the mailing.

Second, use the same messaging for the list of people who were automatically added and never opted out, but try to increase the messaging to an awareness piece rather than a sales piece. The awareness piece should have the same calls to action, but it should also include information about the company and why they’re receiving the e-mail.

Test

Time is tight and resources are limited, but how will you know if what you’re doing has enough impact without testing the e-mails or by even reviewing in  detail the results of the conversion report?

Testing can be expensive. It can leave you with a mixed response that doesn’t always give a clear cut answer as to whether it was the messaging or the design. Our answer is to test both. Send one targeted e-mail with a text-based call to action that has more information than glitz. Send the second e-mail with images and more pizazz  and then wait for the conversions.

There are studies done regularly regarding the usefulness of images and/or text, but not every audience is the same. It’s sometimes costly, both in resource and cost, but it’s well worth it to know how to effectively sell to your audience.

The potential for social networking is astounding. And, to be honest, there are people who get it to work for them more than any sales organization or local chapter / club meeting. Often times, however, we’re asked about what works and doesn’t work on the social networking scene and why we use it (we’re LinkedIn and we have personal accounts on other currently popular sites).

What Works

It works when two people actually want to engage in either debate or opportunity. Nothing is more important to me when it regards incoming requests than to verify what the intention of the connection is. Some people go overboard and get downright pushy. The double-edged sword is to stay in touch and accept invitations and share information with people you know, rather than go all out and extend your network to thousands of people you’ve never met.

Why, you ask? Well, in the case of LinkedIn, in particular, the main reason I would tend to use this networking site is to collaborate with a level of trust. I know that I can typically trust the connection being made if it comes from someone I know and have dealt with in the past.

What Doesn’t Work

It is counterproductive to have an open network. It’s also counterproductive to not share if you have a connection that your trusted acquaintance would like to meet. I mean, that’s the point, really.

A social network will feed on the strength and validity of its services. Taking on more water than the boat can handle will only sink your ship.

Get Involved

The question and answer section is often filled with items that don’t pertain to you or your business, but that certainly doesn’t mean you won’t learn something from going through and digesting the content.

Being involved by answering and posing the questions will at the very least give you a free resource to share and bounce ideas off of if you’re ever in a hurry for some quick perspective. Of course, it’s up to you to decide whether or not the answers you get or read are useful. One thing I have noticed, however, and that is the majority of people are there for the same reason: business networking.

If you have a specific case study or experience on networking, use our contact form to get in touch. We’d love to talk to you.

I posed a question last night on LinkedIn to see how people felt about the state of popular Web design.

Currently, we’re on two projects which state in the requirements “MUST USE 2.0 LOOK AND FEEL”.

Oddly enough, that takes a small amount of discussion. As one response points out, “Web 2.0 is more than just a design trend, it’s a movement to put USERS in control of the information they consume, publish, and share on the web.” I agree.

2.0 (and wherever we are now) is about a lot of things, but that doesn’t always mean people do these things in a usable and thoughtful way. Take, for example, the workflow of a 2.0 mashup. Does it make a site usable just because you can show your Flickr, Facebook and YouTube widgets directly on the same screen? No, but it makes the environment more dynamic and could even give people an incentive to visit you on a regular basis.

I like where things are headed. I embrace change. I think design trends are a double-edged sword that have the potential to create wonderful and exciting environments, or, conversely, wreak havoc on a developer and a designer or a visitor as everyone tries to figure out what the goal is (if they stick around long enough to sort it out).

Our online identities should be unique AND follow a standard approach so that you don’t lose your brand image or voice while offering an interface that doesn’t have to be learned.

When a client asks you to “make it 2.0″, do as they say, but make it your 2.own.