Meet your new Marketing VP

A couple of days ago I visited the subjective nature of ‘expertise’, and how online community software and social networks are actually exaserbating the relative nature of percieved expertise in any given field. I’d like to continue with a direction where I think the true expertise is developing: it’s all in the numbers.

IBM just bought CoreMetrics. Adobe bought Omniture. The job boards for quantitave analysts are a mile long. Why is this? My take is that the culture of hyperanalysis and sweating over every small trackable bit of behaviour that began with successful dotcoms is finally seeping into the larger marketing departments of larger companies. “Marketing” is no longer those guys from Mad Men thinking up new creative copy while sloshing martinis, it’s Anthony Edwards from Revenge of the Nerds now telling you the exact percentages of retention you’ll need from exact zip codes using precicely worded tweets (the text of which was likely written by a robot algorithm).

But let’s be clear– this isn’t a race to hoarde data. This isn’t a contest to see who can lumber through the largest spreadsheets. The data is everywhere, many times for free (thank Google). The real expert is the person with enough classical logic training, statistical classes, and– most importantly– the ability to write well enough to convey a coherent story that explains all the minutae into some sort of actionable plan. (there’s hope for all those philosophy majors after all).

Forrester Wave for ecommerce suites

Relative Goodness

Forrester Research understands this well. They’ve acknowledged the subjective nature of expertise in their data sets: all software rankings and application analyses are based on executive surveys. They figure that if they ask enough questions of enough executives they can get some relevant (subjective as it is) data points from which to present a decent story. Notice that Forrester rarely draws conclusions– they simply present enough data and a nice set of graphics that you can draw your own subjective conclusion. Forrester even gives you the source spreadsheet so you can monkey with the variables and draw your own story. Their success, I believe, is in the strength of their storytelling abilities and presentation skills.

Who is the expert? The person that can divine a coherent direction out of a sea of numbers, that’s who. If Edwards can comb his hair and write well, he’s got the job.

fish-school.jpgMy good friend has decided to look for a new job.  Today, she brought in some good Mexican food for the crew as a thank you.  It was, however, not a free lunch.  In return for the tacos, we were supposed to go to the white board in the conference room and suggest where she might work next.  For the price of 2 dozen lunches, my friend tried to crowdsource her next job.

Soon enough (if not already), everyone will be connected to everyone else in their immediate market segment.  We’ll all have a Kevin Bacon number of 3 or lower.  Linkedin, which originally provided value as the “inside connection” to a given company or executive, now has become the ubiquitous contact folder for everyone.  Where recruiters used to thrive on Linkedin because it complimented and extended their most valuable asset: their rolodex of contacts, it now threatens to replace that rolodex completely.  The Recruiter still has value, as someone who knows how to interview a candidate and get at the soft chewy center of a person to see if they are a good match for the company with an open position, but not as a simple nexus of resumes in one hand and job openings in another.

Given that Linkedin has given us all that magic rolodex, why not try to crowdsource positions?  How could one simultaneously incent the armchair recruiter in all of us, yet invoke enough friction to keep out the spammers and robots?

Here is my idea:

  1. Vigorously pursue companies to list their open positions on the network
  2. Invite people to recommend people in their network for the open positions, with a standing bounty of 10% of first-year salary (still leaving room for the recruiter doing the actual interviews to make 10-15%)
  3. If Andy is going to recommend Betty to C Corporation, then Andy needs to pay $5 to Betty (she’s the one looking for a job, and probably needs the $5 anyway)
  4. C Company would see that Betty is recommended by 7 of her friends (all willing to stake $5 on it), and therefore she is probably worth a look.  If Betty is hired, the 10% is split amongst the 7 people who recommended her.
  5. Andy just profited $1423 for his work (assuming 10% of $100,000 job, spilt 7 ways, minus the $5)

Hmmm.  This might work.  I should ping Harry or Alex or my old friends at Daijob.

UPDATE: 27 May 2010: Looks like I called it.  http://www.notchup.com/ is almost a perfect match for this business model.

© 2010 Dave Jenkins contact me via twitter @davejenk1ns or via email blog at davejenkins dot com Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha