Mark Zuckerberg and 900 million of his friends hit Wallstreet with America’s largest IPO and has once again made history. Facebook’s first trade was $42.05 giving the social network a valuation of ~$115 billion.  In the process, Zuckerberg became the 29th-richest man in the world with another half dozen employees also becoming billionaires. It’s also estimated that U2′s Bono will make more from his investment in Facebook than in his entire 30-year music career.

As the stock trades, investors will learn to Like Facebook as long as Mark and Co. continue to perform for those very investors who may or may not actually have a Facebook account and who may or may not even understand the future of media or the evolution of the human network. Zuckerberg has made it clear that he intends to spend his time, energy and that of his team to run Facebook “the hacker way.” Doing so, he believes, will steer Facebook clear from the fate that befell Myspace. To compete for the future, he will invest in the ongoing development of engaging user experiences. As I mentioned in an interview with Al Jazeera, Digital Darwinism threatens every company, including Facebook, “In an era of digital Darwinism you have to compete for relevance in real time, almost faster than real time.”

Certainly Zuckerberg will face challenges of balancing the company’s focus on investor versus user value and as an analyst, I will not only study its progress, I’ll continue to share my thoughts on where the company can invest its new found capital to effectively compete for relevance.

Let’s start here…

1. Mobile: Facebook must communicate its mobile strategy and how it plans to monetize engagement on tablets and smart phones. As of May 2012, time spent on Facebook via mobile devices exceeds that of traditional desktops. Facebook does not monetize mobile and with this stunning shift in Facebook engagement, the time to do so, was well, yesterday. Post IPO, Facebook must convey its vision and supporting business models for a single view, but dual platform community.

2. Search: To compete with Google in traditional search is fruitless. To compete against Google in social search, where the experiences of friends contribute to an evolving customer decision journey is lucrative. I do believe that search becomes an integrated part of a larger experience where Facebook has the potential to become something along the lines of a personal OS. The idea here is that the right information will find you based on how you curate your network with people, apps, and services. It’s where the online experience and all you do, starts on your personal dashboard.

3. Relevance: As you read, I believe that in order to not only survive Digital Darwinism, businesses must lead stakeholders toward new and rewarding markets. To compete for the future starts with competing for relevance. In almost every business interview I’ve conducted about Facebook, I’m asked whether or not Facebook is “cool” anymore. The discussion naturally progresses toward Myspace, which I feel is counter productive. Comparing Myspace with Facebook is like comparing Saab to BMW or Saturn to Ford. Competing for relevance becomes part of the leadership regime and it’s why on the eve of its IPO, Facebook chose to host an all-night hackathon rather than throw the usual rooftop party made popular in the days of Web 1.0. I guess in its own way, Facebook is trying to stay cool, or more importantly, stay true.

4. Building and Shipping: 1 hacker way isn’t just the way of way of life at Facebook, as the official company address, it’s literally the way to Facebook. Zuckerberg is creating a “build it and ship it” culture. This heads down, in the developer zone focus is part of the company’s now famous ability to innovate and execute. It is also now a potential liability as the company moves into the public and investor spotlight. Fail fast and learn isn’t just part of Facebook, it’s a mantra in silicon valley. However, Facebook must focus on more than just user experience, it must focus on people and behavior globally and locally. Google tends to take an algorithmic approach to development. One could argue that seeing the future through a developer lens and not one of digital anthropology, sociology or ethnography is why Google has wrestled with opportunities to socialize new and existing products. While Facebook builds and ships it must also continue to explore the intersection of technology and liberal arts to build and ship in ways that continue to define or redefine how people discover, connect, and share.

Facebook has every potential to truly earn Wall Street as both a friend and a fan. To do so however, will take the company’s continued investment in the social graph and now also the investor graph.

UPDATE 1: Facebook set a new trading volume record for U.S. market debuts, with over 515 million shares changing hands.

UPDATE 2: At $38, the IPO price was equivalent to more than 100 times historical earnings, compared with Apple’s 14x and Google’s 19x.

In honor of Facebook’s IPO and as my way of sharing my thoughts of whether or not Mark Zuckerberg’s attire will affect his ability to run a successful company, here’s a picture of my hoodie:

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+

The End of Business as Usual is officially here…

Facebook pulled it off.

- The New York Times “DealBook” site, May 17, 2012

A nice summary by NYT “DealBook” writers Evelyn Rusli and Peter Eavis. Facebook did pull off the IPO of the year, pricing at $38 a share for a total sale of $16 billion. The market initially valued the company at $104 billion.

Congratulations, FB!

There is a sense of relief, after the IPO with more media hype than any in recent memory, in seeing it priced and starting to trade. Following a few more days of craziness, no doubt, investors can settle down and begin looking at Facebook as they would view any other public company.

Here are a few bits of information for the curious investor relations pro:

• Facebook’s May 17 news release on pricing the IPO
• The company’s Investor Relations webpage with links to financial info
• The Facebook registration statement

Being public will impose a new sort of discipline on Facebook the company. Thinking about disclosure vs. trial balloons and leaks. Telling investors the basics like revenue and earnings. Meeting quarterly expectations or taking a beating. Perhaps a future day when hedge funds and analysts call for a new CEO.

I’m not going to second-guess the valuation, roughly 100 times trailing 12-month earnings. Or $115 for each of those ballyhooed 900 million users. Enough market gurus already are opining on FB, and people were willing to pay the $38.

Rather, I’m looking forward to watching the biggest social network as it grows and matures in the coming months and years. The “DealBook” writers comment:

The question is whether the company’s management will make it work.

Facebook, in many ways, is like a mining company sitting on valuable deposits that are hard to dig up and refine. At a market value of $104 billion, investors believe Facebook is sitting on gold. But the share price could tumble at any sign that Facebook’s management can’t unearth it.

© 2012 Johnson Strategic Communications Inc.

Even at 250 million Tweets per day in addition to the updates across Facebook, Google+, Pinterest, and every other feed that we willfully subscribe to, information overload is in of itself a fallacy. But the feeling the overload of information is very real and a reflection of our inability to pull the levers necessary to decrease noise and improve signal. Doing so, requires some very blatant actions that don’t simply reduce the volume of the information we don’t care to see as often, it requires disconnecting from human beings. Whether we’re severing ties with individuals or those representing an organization we once supported, it’s emotional. It’s an action that carries an element of guilt knowing that at some point, our action will cause an incremental blow to the psyche of the individual we’re unfollowing.

I know…so what right?

It still is what it is. Yet, we don’t unfollow or unlike as often as we should. So by not reminding people to not be more thoughtful about their posts and updates, we are by default enabling their objectionable behavior.

Think about why you Tweet or update your status. It’s part self-expression, part therapy, part fulfilling, and of course, part egocentric. You share something and naturally, you await or anticipate a response. There’s a bit of anticipation that builds up around it. Have you ever tried Qwitter? It’s an old school service, when compared to the overall history of the Twitter ecosystem, that tells you who unfollowed you, when, and gives you the Tweet that sent them over the edge.

We are as guilty by our inaction as others are for their action. And at the same time, we are also guilty of contributing to the noise. The truth is that it’s easier to blame others than hold up a digital mirror.  But now, some very interesting reports are substantiating what we’re feeling. In one such study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University, MIT and Georgia Tech, people on Twitter said that only one-third of Tweets that hit their streams are worthwhile. All others are either at best “meh” or not worth reading at all. It’s not a surprise of course that a well-received Tweet is not all that common.

So, what makes a Tweet worthy of response or sharing? The team is currently studying the specifics, but initial findings point to tweets that included questions, featured curated/relevant information with added personality, and those used for self-promotion, such as including links to original content.

Paul André, a post-doctoral fellow in Carnegie Mellon’s Human-Computer Interaction Institute (HCII) and lead author of the study explained an important outcome of the research, “If we understood what is worth reading and why, we might design better tools for presenting and filtering content, as well as help people understand the expectations of other users.”

While we await tools that will save us from ourselves, the research team documented nine best practices to use as an editorial guideline of sorts. While the information is drawn from insights on Twitter, I’m sure that they apply across other networks as well. The idea is that these lessons will improve our own streams while inspiring others to do the same…

9 Ways to Improve the Signal to Noise Ratio in Social Networks

1. News No Longer Breaks, it Tweets: Old news is no news. Twitter places emphasis on real-time information. Followers quickly get bored of even relatively fresh links seen multiple times – unless they’re repackaged through a different lens of context or perspective.

2. Add Perspective: Opinions in social media tend to spark dialogue. So, add an opinion, a pertinent fact or move the conversation forward rather than simply sending your update or hitting Like or Retweet. Consider the MT (modified Tweet) if you will to express your views. It is the difference between who you know you are and who others think you are that is fortified through your words.

3. K.I.S.S.: I often say, in brevity there’s clarity. Of course, it’s easier said than done. Studies show that followers appreciate conciseness. Keep it short. Using as few characters as possible also leaves room for longer, more satisfying comments on retweets. But even that’s not enough. Think about a new K.I.S.S. where simplicity is replaced with significance and short is substituted with baked-in shareability (Keep It Significant and Shareable).

4. Don’t #geekout with @’s and #Syntax LOL <-This!: It’s pretty easy to geek out on Twitter…especially when using 140 characters is already too complicated (kidding). Often we’re ompelled to overuse Twitter syntax such as #hashtags, @mentions, code, and abbreviations. But, if you study the art and science of Retweets, you’ll quickly learn that syntax might make you seem cool, but these tweets are harder to read, interpret, and by default, are unshareable. However, syntax can be helpful when context is inherent in the Tweet. For example, if posing a question, adding a hashtag that explains the nature of or the inspiration for the Tweet helps everyone follow along, which also lends to reactions.

5. Strengthen Your Inner Voice: For some reason, Twitter debilitates our ability to practice self restraint and therefore we are somehow inspired to express nonessential experiences. As the study found, these cliched “sandwich” Tweets about pedestrian or personal details were by and large disliked. If Tweets had an “unfavorite” button or if Facebook employed an “unlike” button, people would learn in real-time the hard lessons delivered through services such as Qwitter.

6. Context is King: As discussed early with K.I.S.S., short isn’t always a #winning strategy. Sometimes Tweets that are too short leave readers unable to understand their meaning. How many times have you read a Tweet where context, intention, or tone was impossible to discern? The study found that by simply linking to a blog or photo, without providing a reason to click on it was “lame.” Think about each Tweet or update as contributing to an experience or image that you want others to see of you or of your perspective.

7. If You Don’t Have Anything Good to Say…:  This is interesting to say the least. It should be no surprise that negative sentiments and complaints were disliked. Yet, people complain every day. In fact, there’s a bit of an inside joke on Twitter. It seems that only “social media experts” have problems with airlines because we’ll hear about it every time.  Studies show that too many complaints only turn off followers. The same is true on Facebook. Coincidentally, we are also learning that by taking to Twitter to vent, it’s both becoming the quickest path to resolution and also the act of expressing frustration proves cathartic. The community is far more forgiving of negative Tweets aimed at companies. But, if you aim your negativity at individuals regularly, you will lose favor among your followeres. Find.the.balance.

8. Introduce Brain Teasers: Savvy marketers, producers, and editors alike figured out long ago that building anticipation creates an appetite before an official release. While this isn’t new to the world of distribution, simply releasing content isn’t good enough. The idea is too build strategic and thoughtful anticipation for big Tweets. Often, if we’re caught up in conversations or observations, we miss an opportunity to alert followers that something big is about to come. So when we say something important, the response is stunted. Additionally, like news or professional organizations that want readers to click on their links, add a compelling hook. It’s important to not give away all of the news in the Tweet itself. Intrigue your followers.

9. Brands are People Too:  The study found that individuals or businesses with a public persona should pay particular attention to how their status updates lend to the brand they wish to portray. Sounds incredibly commonsensical, but it’s not as it ties to several of the bullets above. People often say things that erode the mystique or the grandeur of a persona by measure of the expectations of the community.  As the authors of the report share, “People often follow you to read professional insights and can be put off by personal gossip or everyday details.” I believe this is true for any individual or organization and as such, what’s shared and what isn’t shared should contribute to the perception desired.

Of course, it doesn’t take technology to introduce the importance of self-control and governance. But that’s part of the marvel here. We may in fact need tools to do what it is we cannot, tune out people en massé or withhold from expressing what we think in the moment or only say the things that reinforce the “personal brand” we envision. Whatever it is we do moving forward, what’s clear is that, according to research, Twitter, Facebook and other social networks are only reflections of our real world society. In the digital realm, by tweeting our lives, one can proudly exclaim, “I Tweet therefore I am.” And at the same time, one must consider whether or not simply Tweeting what comes to mind isn’t just contributing to a far more likely reality, “I Tweet and therefore I am…adding to the noise.”

Some of you know me through my work in studying how social media and disruptive technology impact business and culture. Others have worked with me in translating insights into action and change within the enterprise.  Every now and then, I share another side of myself that evokes the aspiring social scientist in me as I explore how all of this is affecting us as individuals and human beings.

Not a day goes by when I’m not asked about whether or not the social media bubble will finally burst. Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Foursquare, Pinterest, this all has to be too much right? More often than not, I’m expected to assume the role of psychologist to either validate their digital existence or help individuals understand, and in some cases cope, with what is most often diagnosed as information overload.

This isn’t a new phenomenon by any means. The sensation of being overwhelmed by information has been linked to every media revolution. With every new innovation and the mass adoption of disruptive technology, the volume of information available to us grows exponentially. With media now so pervasive and portable, information, of any focus, is available, on demand, and more importantly, resides in our hands to create and consume at will. We are, for better or for worse, always on. And this is both part of the problem and part of the solution for how we evolve as individuals and as an information society.

Social media has gifted us a new democracy. And with it, the ability to connect to people around the world and create, share, and devour knowledge, entrainment, and irrelevant information at will. It’s as intimidating as it is beautiful. We have passed the Attention Rubicon and there is no turning back. The towers of social media will not come crumbling down upon the foundation of a former reality when we or the generations before us led a much simpler life. The key for us now is forged in self-control or some form of aspirational governance that focuses our connects and interactions.

Indeed, there is a very real human cost of social connectivity. But, the symptoms of information overload are only a reflection of our inability or lack of desire to bring order to our chaos. See, we are the engineers of the media levees that prevent overflow.

The challenge lies not in the realization that we are empowered to curate our social streams and relationships, but in the consciousness of what is and what could be. Meaning, that we must first understand that how we’re connecting, consuming, and creating today is either part of the problem or part of the solution. We, and only we, are in control of information overload and everything begins with acceptance.

Where do we fall in the contrast of where we are and where we want to be? For these dichotomous positions are separated only by our vision and actions. But even still, with the glut of information and the overwhelming sense of responsibility to duly engage, we succumb to fatigue.

Like in anything, there’s a dark side to all of this. One of the quiet perils of living in an always-on society is the need to stay connected. In part, we’re driven by relevance or the fear of irrelevance. If we are always part of the conversation, we remain top of mind. Additionally, we’re driven by a sense of vanity. We need to see what, if anything, people are saying about us, how they’re reacting to our engagement, and who others are talking about or to whom they’re connecting.

There’s a perpetual sense of “missing out,” which is I think at varying levels, true for all digital denizens. These networks after all are homes to very emotional exchanges. We laugh, love, fight, cry, but most of all, we live…and for some of us, we live online differently than we live in real life. The difference is, to what extent are we compelled to plug in and participate, how often, for what duration, and at what emotional depth. The answer either defines are digital lifestyle or our digital lifestyle defines us.

In 2010, Pennsylvania’s Harrisburg University of Science and Technology introduced a week-long ban of social media in an effort to curb the media diets of students. What was the inspiration for the ban? According to Harrisburg University provost Eric Darr, stress and potential addiction played strong roles in the cold turkey experiment.

Darr shared his concerns in an interview with Fast Company, “I’m sure that we have some students who are clinically close to addiction…that aside, it’s clearly the case that this set of technologies has the possibility of taking over our lives.”

Following the ban, the university conducted surveys that revealed some disturbing realities. One such result was the level of duress students were under in checking status updates on a variety of social media sites. Sound familiar? Roughly 15% of students admitted to spending between 11 to 20 hours on social media sites such as Facebook every day. This reminds me of the science fiction novel by Philip K. Dick, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.”

Our digital lives will only become far more challenging to manage. With smart phones, tablets, in-car technology, wifi in public spots in addition to planes, trains, and automobiles, the temptation to connect is pervading. And it doesn’t just stop there. Social networks are investing technology and marketing in expanding your online relationships. Through recommendation engines, they lure you to link outside of your social graph, those you know to now form an interest graph, those with whom you share common interests.

Information overload is a real phenomenon, but it is I believe, by design. It either works for us or against us and it is our choice as to which way the stream flows. To be clear, information overload is a symptom of over consumption and the inability to refine online experiences based on interest and importance.

Early in 2012, I hosted a poll across Twitter, Facebook, and Google+ to get their perspectives on information overload.  I asked a simple question, “Do you suffer from information overload because of social media?” The answers were revealing…You can see the detailed results here (comments are worth reading too).

Just over 800 people in 41 countries responded and the results while scattered, told a compelling story. If we look at a simple take on yes or no, only 14% say that they feel overwhelmed with 21% affirming that they are in control of their online experience. Another 57% however feel that they are sometimes overwhelmed with social media, but they do believe it’s in their hands to manage. Interestingly, when you combine Yes, Sometimes, and “I’m addicted,” you can get a better idea of the pervasiveness of information overload, or aspects of it.

In his new book, “Too Big to Know,” good friend David Weinberger shares why Information overload is our new golden age. Weinberger believes that facts have been replaced by “networked facts,” which are the result of a collective repository of shared experiences and exchanges in any digital network. In his book, Weinberger makes the case that technology can now easily feed our endless curiosity. And, as a result, how we learn, connect, interact, and work is forever changed…for the better.

Access to information and people is intoxicating. Creating an online portrait of who we are or who we want others to see is equality alluring.  But without direction, governance, and discipline, we are at risk of giving ourselves to the very networks we value rather than managing the platforms to our advantage. Our participation must be inspired by purpose and parameters. No, we are not obligated to connect with everyone who connects with us. We are obligated to maintain balance in who we are, what we value, and equally the value we invest in the communities in which we participate.

As Clay Shirky once observed, “There’s no such thing as information overload — only filter failure.”

My take? “Information overload is a symptom of our desire to not focus on what’s important.” It’s a choice.

Perhaps said another way, information overload is a symptom of our inability to focus on what’s truly important or relevant to who we are as individuals, professionals, and as human beings. But then again, maybe that’s the problem.

The reality is that we are learning how to use these networks and what to expect in return. We’re learning what’s possible. However, we learn as we go. We discover where the proverbial line is only after we’ve crossed or are witnesses to those who do. Our teachers, parents, role models and peers, they to coming to grips with the evolution of social media and digital culture as it affects online and offline behavior along with us. Therefore, this is a time when we are all students. But at some point, we must also become teachers

Connect with me: Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Google+

Please consider ordering The End of Business as Usual today…

Image credit: Shutterstock

In the age of globalization and social media there is increased demand for a new type of communication practitioners capable of adapting to rapid organizational change and constantly emerging online communities. These specialists should not only be familiar with numerous social tools available, but also understand the importance of ethical choices when using these tools and applications. Clearly, organizational efficiency goes beyond acquiring instructional knowledge or simply demonstrating mechanistic skills. According to Pamela Shockley-Zalabak (2009), communication competency develops from an increased understanding of the communication process; ability to sense accurately the meanings and feelings of oneself and others in the organization; improved skills in communication, conflict management, and decision making; and finally, a well-defined sense of organizational and interpersonal ethics.

In their roles as counsel to the CEO or manager of company’s reputation, professional communicators are expected to define and instill company values; build and manage multi-stakeholder relationships; enable the enterprise with “new media” skills and tools; and finally, build and manage trust. The adoption of this framework is particularly intended for education and training providers responsible for successful professional development of the next generation of professional communicators. The role of educators, therefore, is to help students understand new roles and responsibilities of public relations practitioners and provide them with adequate training to cultivate fundamental communication competencies reflective of changes of the industry.

In many countries there is a steady need for competent public relations professionals to assure nation-building inter-ethnic campaigns locally and public diplomacy efforts internationally. Kazakhstan is one of the most successful Central Asian countries among those that emerged from the breakup of the former Soviet Union. Kazakhstan represents an interesting example of a complex, inter-ethnic society working rapidly to adjust to globalization in order to keep up with constantly emerging professional requirements. The rapid growth of the oil and gas industries has significantly contributed to economic growth and decline in poverty. It also increased government public diplomacy efforts for nation branding to promote the country among international businesses and the global political community.

Communication researchers Sergei Samoilenko, George Mason University and Dr. Deborah Ballard-Reisch from Wichita State joined their colleague from Kazakhstan Dr. Akhatova to assess of the quality of the public relations education recently offered in Kazakhstan universities to satisfy the government ambitions for international recognition and acceptance. Primarily, the researchers wanted to understand current expectations held by business employers in Kazakhstan regarding important communication competencies that university graduates with a degree in public relations should possess in order to be successful in their organizations. Their research was intended to provide practical guidelines for educators to develop new curricula in strategic communications that will help Kazakhstan universities better prepare future communication specialists and increase opportunities for their employment.

The research team utilized a multi method survey with qualitative and quantitative components, which was distributed to over hundred chief communication officers or those holding upper management positions in public relations. The survey dealt with professionals’ expectations regarding crucial communication competencies that university graduates with a degree in public relations should possess in order to be successful in their organizations.

The researchers designed a communication competency instrument based on the organizational communication competency framework developed by Shockley-Zalabak (2009). The Shockley-Zalabak (2009) model consists of four major components: knowledge (the ability to understand the organizational communication environment), communication skills (various abilities to accurately analyze organizational situations and to effectively initiate, develop, disseminate and receive organizational messages), sensitivity (the ability to accurately understand organizational meanings and appropriately analyze roles and relationships, and values (understanding how individual and organizational values/ethics can shape organizational climate).

According to research findings, the discussed four criteria showed moderate to strong correlations (as seen in the accompanying iconographic below), while 54% of the variance in skills was explained by the three predictors (knowledge, sensitivity and values).

The potential employers also identified college degree, professional standards, language skills, and psychology, as the most important knowledge criteria for young professionals; creativity, flexibility, adaptability, the ability to decrease stress, sociability, and diplomacy, as the most important sensitivity criteria competence; using new information technologies, relationship building, self-control, ability to initiate dialogue, persuasion, and negotiation as the most important skills criteria for young professionals; and being reliable, responsible, punctual, diligent, and versatile, as the most important values criteria for young professionals.

The grounded inductive analysis of qualitative data produced seven major themes:

1) Communication skills: oral/written communication skills, the ability to interact effectively in interpersonal through public speaking contexts as well as in business communication

2) Building quality relationships

3) Knowledge of and support for the advancement of the corporate image

4) Ethical business practices

5) Training: including formal education and continuing, on-going skill development

6) Technical competence

7) Personal characteristics

The following should be noted:

• Employers surveyed for this project recognized the importance of knowledge, skills, sensitivity and values in their practices. In their open-ended responses, participants elaborated on nature and characteristics of these constructs in culturally and contextually unique ways.

• There are several discrepancies between quantitative and qualitative results in this research. While in their open ended responses, employers discussed the importance of education and ongoing professional development to the quality and capacity of communications professionals, when asked direct questions about the importance of education and professional organizations, they rated them as having little or no importance. This indicates that while business professionals recognize the importance of the skills learned through education and professional organizations, they do not yet recognize the role of formal education and ongoing training in the development and refinement of desired skills.

• The lack of a developed communication discipline in Kazakhstan has led to a lack of understanding of the importance of the discipline to the business sector.

• That knowledge, sensitivity and values account for 54 percent of the variance in skills demonstrates the interrelated nature of these constructs and the importance of knowledge, sensitivity and values as the foundation for skill development.

• Uniqueness in the results of this study indicate the need for international consultants and collaborators to remain culturally sensitive as they attempt to assist Kazakhstan in the development of the academic discipline of public relations and work to identify the critical communication competencies of public relations and human resources professionals. Assessment measures must be evaluated and tailored appropriately to meet the needs of the culture in Kazakhstan.

The authors recommend that universities offering the major in public relations seek opportunities to collaborate with employers and communications professionals to assure that curriculum is developed and skills critical to the success of business and organizations are at the core of university and professional training in public relations and human resources. Reciprocally, professionals and employers of human resources and public relations workers should also seek opportunities for collaboration with universities to assure the overall quality of the entry-level public relations and human resources specialists.

Educators should seek ways to develop common norms and standards for, public relations education that would pertain to communication competency criteria. Since the range of required criteria pertaining to the development of necessary knowledge, skills, sensitivity and values is relatively broad, the introduction of communication education as an autonomous discipline at Kazakh universities is highly recommended. Active involvement in professional national and international communities, and on-going professional education will help improve the overall quality of public relations curriculum, textbooks and resources and class activities.

Following the preliminary results of this study, the Kazakhstan Communication Association (KazCA) was founded. The mission of the new organization was to bring together specialists representing various fields (mass communications, journalism, political science, sociology, linguistics, etc) who are interested in helping establish communication as a scholarly discipline in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

On June 27, 2011 KazCA held its first international conference. The conference discussed several initiatives pertaining to promoting the image of Kazakhstan in the global community, creating a communicative model for social development, and using communication research to address sociocultural, political and economic problems in the context of globalization.

Note: Sergei Samoilenko and Deirdre Breakenridge are working on a new version of Communication Competency instrument to replicate this study in the United State this summer.  If you are interested in participating in their research, please email Sergei at sergeisamoilenko@gmail.com or visit his new blog at http://sergeisamoilenko.wordpress.com/

The iconographic below was designed by SMM3, Communication Consulting Company http://smm3.org/ from Belarus specializing in Social Media Marketing, Monitoring and Analysis in Post-Soviet Countries and Eastern Europe.

In my travels and face-to-face meetings with advisors, I spend a lot of time listening how they are generating leads.

Again, this is the #1, hot-brand issue for most financial professionals, so any insight here is extremely powerful.

1. Via advisor’s website: This is just effective, blocking and tackling. It’s not enough to just have a website or blog. Advisors who are good at generating new leads know how to effectively give-away content (whitepaper or presentation) on their websites in return for an email address.
2. Online ads: Ken Fisher, massive $40B+ RIA is a well-oiled machine with its targeted advertising on search engines. Fisher uses small ads that have the ability to hyper-target an ideal prospect and get them to click. Again, you’ll need to send the user to a page on your site and give them something of value to get more of their details so you can follow up with them directly.
3. LinkedIn: Many advisors completely miss the boat on the power of LinkedIn to help them grow their businesses. But, LinkedIn is perhaps one of the most powerful tools for identifying hot leads for your advisory practice (assuming, you can define who your target client is). Smart advisors are using the advanced search feature on LinkedIn to find those people in their network that fit their ideal prospect bill. Save this search and LinkedIn continues to monitor the results of your search and delivers any new hits, new names to you when they pop up.
4. Online presentations: Slideshare (just bought by LinkedIn) is a really powerful platform for powerpoints, PDFs, presentations. There are other platforms for audio and video. Live webinars continue to work well to generate leads (you need an email to signup!) for advisors who can get people to sign up for them. Prospects interested in following the breadcrumbs back will find their way to the advisor’s website in the form of a qualified lead.
5. Old school still works: The ROI of offline marketing has gone down but only an insane person would claim that old school techniques don’t work anymore. Seminars, direct mail, cold calling, effective networking — these things all still work.

What are you doing to generate leads? What’s working for you?

Q: Do you ever wish you were publicly traded?

A: Oh God, no. I have the greatest job in the world, because I work for a guy who runs the company for the next 20 years, not the next 90 days. It’s tough being a public company, and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

 –  Steve Feilmeier, executive VP & CFO
Koch Industries, Inc.

As investor relations people, we rub elbows mostly with publicly traded companies. We think about how to get our message out to the capital markets in competition with other public companies, especially our peers within narrow industry sectors.

But a whole other class of competitors exists in a parallel universe – competitors for capital and, in our businesses, for customers. Maybe we ought to pay attention.

What started me thinking was Steve Feilmeier, CFO of Koch Industries, who spoke this morning to the Kansas City chapter of Association for Corporate Growth. Known to outsiders mostly for media attention in political controversies, on the business side Koch is a $125 billion company with 67,000 employees – the No. 2 privately held business in America. No. 1 in profitability, Feilmeier hastens to add.

Right at the start, Feilmeier says being privately held is a competitive advantage:

We benefit from not having to report earnings every 90 days. All of our decisions are based on, How is this going to work out in the next 10 years?

And it’s working out just fine for Koch (sounds like “coke”). The firm is doubling revenue every five or six years with a dozen operating companies in agriculture, energy and manufacturing. Although Koch doesn’t report publicly, Feilmeier makes it clear those businesses are delivering even better growth in EBITDA (slides here).

An example of Koch’s presence: AngelSoft, its toilet tissue brand, is the No. 1 SKU in Walmart stores. No. 1. Feilmeier says 60 truckloads a day leave Koch’s Georgia-Pacific subsidiary loaded just with AngelSoft four-packs bound for Walmarts.

The ongoing shift in institutional investor preferences among asset classes is the other thing that got me thinking. I keep hearing about pension funds, endowments and real people putting more money into alternative investments – capital that isn’t flowing to publicly held companies represented by IR pros.

Consider these stats: In 2001 U.S. pension funds held 65% of assets in equities, but that dropped to 44% by 2011, according to the Towers Watson Global Pension Assets Study 2012. in those 10 years, the “Other” category in asset allocation – real estate, private equity and hedge funds – quintupled from 5% to 25%. Apply those changes to $16 trillion in U.S. pension assets and you’re talking real money.

Without getting in over my head further on macro views of the capital markets, my point is that public companies ought to think strategically about their investors. Institutions and individuals don’t have to invest in any particular public company. They might even flee the stock market, with some of their funds, for “alternatives.”

And this brings me back to Koch. Feilmeier’s description of why Koch keeps growing at the top line – and especially the bottom line – holds lessons that public companies and IR people might take to heart. A few interesting ideas:

• Do investors see management-by-quarterly-numbers, or something like Koch’s “patient & disciplined” creation of wealth? How do we discuss performance?
• Can we demonstrate how our incentive pay turns managers into entrepreneurs, who get paid when they deliver (and not when they don’t)?
• Do we have real accountability? Koch doesn’t believe in subsidizing any of its businesses, so operating execs are responsible for balance sheets and P&Ls.
• How do we make decisions? Koch demands rigorous comparison of every capital project with alternatives – will this investment deliver the best return?

Koch, of course, is a giant company. There are well-managed and poorly managed firms of every size in both the public and private arenas. But the principles Feilmeier discussed are common private-equity approaches to driving performance.

Private vs. public is a common debate among CEOs and finance folks. Some private companies long for public status – and a fortunate few make it through the IPO process to get listed. On the other hand some micro-cap and even mid-cap public companies wish they were private, to escape the hassles of quarterly reporting.

Whether public or private, maybe we need to get back to basics of running companies by rigorous disciplines of wealth creation. And public companies need to communicate how those disciplines create real shareholder value.

What do you think?

© 2012 Johnson Strategic Communications Inc.

In the spirit of graduation, we thought a terrific way to celebrate would be to bring back one of our past #PRStudChat graduates; he’s out in the work world now and ready to share his experience with our community.  Kion Sanders, who graduated from the University of North Carolina, is now working at MTV, as a social media coordinator. Kion will join us as a graduation speaker to offer his insight on different work initiatives and challenges on the job. At the same time, as a community, we can look back and reflect on the year filled with our favorite stories, projects, resources, obstacles and advice to help our graduates, as they transition into their new roles.

Here’s a little more about our graduation speaker:

Kion Sanders works at MTV Networks as a social media coordinator. His professional experience includes: political communications, grass roots marketing, consumer public relations, media relations and training, event planning, social media marketing and corporate communications.  Kion blogs at “They Call Me Social K,” which is a community for communicators, marketers, small business owners, students, social media addicts and the casual Internet browser to converse about marketing and branding.

We’re looking forward to celebrating the graduating class of 2012, reflecting on the year and wishing our students well, as they venture into new career opportunities.  We hope you will join us on the 16^th and be a part of the #PRStudChat commencement program.  “See” you at the party!

A Little More About PRStudChat:

It began with a simple question asked by Angela Hernandez, then President of PRSSA at Central Michigan University (CMU). “Is PR Right for me?” A follow up blog post by PR 2.0 expert Deirdre Breakenridge inspired a series of direct messages on Twitter between Breakenridge and fellow PR industry pro, Valerie Simon. This was an important question and one that should be explored beyond one student or one blog post. Why not build a community to help students across the country, and even the globe, learn from the experience and perspective of industry professionals… A community where everyone can learn and grow together. Read more