SoKy Local Business or "SoKybiz" SoKybiz Small business in Southern Kentucky Ky.

Friday, April 27, 2007

E-mail Newsletters a useful piece of the communications puzzle

I've been a "tentative advocate" of eNews or direct e-mail marketing. Tentative because the temptation to overdo it or to abuse the communications channel exists. Advocate because anytime you can continue communications with your target client, customer, and/or contact you are staying "top of mind" and that's always a good thing.

Anita Campbell of Small Business Trends posted a recent blog that would indicate that not only is sending an e-mail newsletter worth the time and effort, it is also quite effective. She writes:

For the past two years some have been predicting that RSS feeds and spam would kill the email newsletter. However, it appears that email newsletters are alive and well.
In fact, small businesses subscribe to one to five email newsletters. Even more interesting, most actually read — or at least skim — the majority of newsletters they receive.
Read whole blog at Small Business Trends

I have recently finished an e-mail newsletter application for one of my clients and it too seems to be working. I try my best to keep the client down to one mailing per month just so as to not abuse the contact relationship, but I also gave each contact the ability to take themselves off the list.

It's very important these days to maintain a good image, stay in contact but also comply with the new and untested spam laws. Staying true to the spirit of the laws is what works for me. Some simple check points...

Each contact added to the distribution are known to the business
When possible, the contact has given permission to add them to the list
The frequency of the e-mail are kept to a minimum
The e-mail is brief, to the point and easy to read
Every e-mail includes a link that allows the recipient to "opt out" of future e-mail
Each e-mail is sent directly to the recipient (not BCC, or worse, CC to a bulk list)
Each e-mail includes the contact name, "Dear Mr. Contact"
Offer unknown web visitors the ability to subscribe to the list using double checks. This means the person can add their own e-mail address but also must activate the account through a link sent to the address to be added
The information online should be secure so as to not allow the list to be "stolen" by unscrupulous characters

Some would (and have) argued that these safeguards are too stringent and that a business should be allowed to use e-mail in aggressive ways, or that all these safeguards are unnecessary. I disagree. The public image of a small business depends on being respectful to their clients/customers, honoring their privacy, time and attention through infrequent contact, short and sweet letters lends well to conveying respect to the contact. Some of these checkpoints are to comply with legal requirements as well.

I'm glad to read Anita's article that eNews is effective and useful for the small business person. I will continue to develop tools for my business as well as client businesses, to use this resource in effective ways.

Communication is the key! eNews is just one more tool in the ever growing virtual toolbox. It should fit into the overall marketing plan of a business. A plan that is well thought out and with a defined purpose in mind. It should all look and feel the same and all work in concert to accomplish the mission. If it is to sell tickets, travel, services or ideas, eNews can be a useful piece of the communications puzzle.

Labels: branding, e-mail marketing, internet, marketing, planning, small business

This was posted by SoKy : 6:50 AM 0 comments links to this post

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Scrapping the Internet

Over the past several months, I've written many many times about the changes I am making. I mean nothing has gone unchallenged from spirituality to my core business. At times I wonder if my desire for change is unnecessary or used as a diversion from the task at hand. I wonder if I am wasting my time or truly innovating who I am, what I am doing and/or how I am doing it.

Then I wake up early this morning and read about researchers who are actually considering scrapping the Internet as we know it...

Researchers explore scrapping Internet
By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet Writer Fri Apr 13, 6:24 PM ET
Although it has already taken nearly four decades to get this far in building the Internet, some university researchers with the federal government's blessing want to scrap all that and start over.
The idea may seem unthinkable, even absurd, but many believe a "clean slate" approach is the only way to truly address security, mobility and other challenges that have cropped up since UCLA professor Leonard Kleinrock helped supervise the first exchange of meaningless test data between two machines on Sept. 2, 1969.
The Internet "works well in many situations but was designed for completely different assumptions," said Dipankar Raychaudhuri, a Rutgers University professor overseeing three clean-slate projects. "It's sort of a miracle that it continues to work well today."
Read the whole story at Yahoo News

Now that's interesting!
The smartest people in the world, from MIT to DoD are in agreement that innovation may be necessary. While there is little in the article to indicate what the changes would be, I must admit that it makes sense.

The article indicates that the Internet infrastructure is old. The basic concepts used are based on research accomplished in 1969. There have been significant changes to the way computers work, the ways we access and use the Internet and even the content found on the world wide information superhighway. From the way packets of data is transferred to the way it is stored, they are looking at the very foundation of the Internet.

I think it's a good thing!
I'm slightly older than the Internet itself and I too have been going through a transformation per se. I've been in research mode for about a year now and I'm pleased with the results. Change is inevitable and can be either embraced or ignored. Change for the sake of changing however can be a mistake which brings to mind, "if it works, don't fix it." Therein lies the challenge. Embracing changes that are important and fix, correct or otherwise improve a person, product or technology is a good thing, seeking change for no reason at all however can actually be counter productive.

Finding the things that need to be changed vs. changing the things that should be left alone, now that is the question. In business, it is a good thing to look for ways to innovate a process, policy, product or procedure if done with the attitude that the effort may result in leaving it alone. Entering the process of innovation should be done with an eye to what works and why, then what needs to be different and why. If there is more working than needs to be changed, one should consider leaving it alone.

I hope as these researchers consider scrapping the Internet (which equate to tax dollars), they do so with an eye toward what works! I hope that someone other than a physics researcher looks at what makes the Internet so popular, what the users want from it and why it has become what it is today despite the perceived flaws in the foundation.

I've seen an entire house lifted and the foundation repaired or replaced, then the house returned to the new and improved foundation. Perhaps there is a lesson in this for those considering the changes to the Internet. Perhaps they should consider repairing or replacing the bricks and mortar that hold up the popular and useful elements of the web, without forcing those who support it to relearn all of the skills it has taken so long to learn.

There was another article recently on eCommerceTimes.com about how Microsoft has completely revamped the way the popular Microsoft Outlook software handles e-mail. The new version changes many ways that e-mail is displayed on the users screen causing a few "issues" in how designers can create effective communications. As I read the article, my mind went back to the day when AOL e-mail was so hard to design for that many people just gave up trying and sent a link to AOL users. In the end, people migrated to new software and away from AOL completely. I hope this is not the case for Microsoft as I am a huge fan of Outlook and Microsoft.

The changes that Microsoft made seem to be a little counter productive on the surface. Why did they change? Was it for security? Was it to comply with some of the legal issues they have endured? I don't know, but on the surface it seems they made the change either for the sake of change or, as is implied in the article, to make users more reliant on their premium product. Either way, it seems to be a mistake. I will continue to monitor this closely.

I do believe we should continue to look at ways to make the Internet safer, more reliable and more useful. Spending billions of dollars of tax money on it is not my preferred method. Allowing the commercial market to place demands that "inspire" manufacturers to innovate is the method I prefer. That said, would the Internet even be a reality had it not been for the inquisitive researchers of the 60's? Good question.

Helpful links: