Over the past 3 months I’ve talked to over 25 companies primarily in the Business-to-Business (B2B) space and mostly technology companies (software and hardware).

 Specifically, I was asking questions including:

• What types of traditional marketing activities are you maintaining (webinars, website development, paper-based sales and marketing collateral, seminars, etc.)?
• What types of digital marketing activities are you engaged in (blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn lead generation, Facebook, partner driven digital marketing, SEO/SEM, etc.)?
• Are you combining the two disciplines and in what ways?

 The types of responses were a little surprising as I thought there would be more push toward exercising these emerging techniques around digital marketing.

 What I found was the following in regards to digital marketing:

1. Most companies were taking a wait-and-see strategy. That is they were waiting to see what their partners or competitors were doing before they invested a lot of time and effort.
2. They were unclear about the ROI from digital marketing activities. Some said that they didn’t see any early returns from looking at how their market was engaged in these activities.
3. They were indeed monitoring digital trends and activities – usually informally – until the time they thought would be appropriate for them to take the plunge.
4. In general, they didn’t see the value in Twitter but did see some value in LinkedIn – as this was a professional community – one that they could have meaningful discussions through. However, even with LinkedIn, almost none of them had anything truly formal going on.
5. There seemed to be an executive gap. Mid-level managers and rank and file employees were more apt to use informal social media communication than senior management. Security and trust were important issues at the senior level.

There were some clear trends that I plan on illustrating in some follow-up blogs and reports, but this is a quick readout of what I found.  Keep in touch or sign up for my future reports.

And please add your comments as I’d appreciate what you’ve found.

Note to above: About 15 of these discussions were formal – that is they followed a prescribed set of questions that lasted approximately one hour. Discussions with the remaining 10 companies were more informal although in general the same types of questions were asked.

And there are always more than a few good articles at B2B Magazine for which I used their logo as an illustration above.

Since I tend to frequently use what I suggest, I keep getting asked lately what technologies I’m suggesting to help some of my clients. This is not a simple question since it typically depends on the client. What’s good for one situation is not always good for the next. In a sense, I could answer this from different perspectives and to make this personal I’ll use my background as a backdrop. You could do the same since, particularly if you have a broad range of experience or have a specific knowledge base. 

From one perspective, as a former IT Architect at AT&T Bell Laboratories, I typically pushed the edge of applying and incorporating the latest technologies. Since there were legions of programmers around me, if the technology performed poorly, I or someone around me could probably fix it. This is the least likely scenario today in business and although the first to be mentioned here, is my last choice – unless - this new technology could provide you with a significant edge against your competition. This frequently occurred with some of the big capital markets companies like Citi or Goldman Sachs where a microsecond head’s start in trading can be everything (first mover always wins in that market).
 
From another perspective, as an end user of technology and former Risk Manager in the financial and insurance world, I can say I gravitated towards first fully understanding the software programs that I had access to and what their strengths and deficiencies were. I then tended to experiment with commercial off-the-shelf programs that I could manage myself. So I would sometimes try a new software program using a subset of the data and information that I had at hand. Since I knew the data intimately, I frequently tried running new software alternatives against that data to understand whether the new results were better, or more importantly I tried to discover whether I could gain some fresh insights into this old data. If the new program didn’t take me a lot of learing time and was easy to install, I knew I was on to something. As an example, I used this approach successfully to deliver just-in-time risk reports to our large customers using a software tool that no one was using at the time. It took me from a manager to an Asst VP early in my career.

Lastly, I think there is the case of smaller companies (under 200 employees) who simply can’t get too far down the track with new programs. With this set of users, and I have some, focusing on simplicity and complementary programs is the right approach. These tend to be Microsoft Office only shops – maybe with some specialty programs like CAD (Computer Aided Design) if they are an engineering design firm for example. In fact, the operative technique here is to use programs that easily fit together and have been integrated together by many companies.

In short, keep these in mind before adding new technologies:

• What are your business needs – first and foremost?
• What technology resources, capabilities and people do you have and will this drain them from doing other worthwhile projects?
• Does it complement and add value to what I’m doing? What are some complementary and low-risk technologies that I could use?
• Is there a short term ( < 6mos) bang for the buck? Long term ROI doesn’t make it with many managers today.
• Will it require a lot of integration with other programs?
• Can I get a business user to trial it quickly?
• How will it get supported (internally/externally)?

So what are some of the technology picks that I like for business? I have a number of them depending on your size and on whether you’re a wealth management company, a health care company developing its web presence, a small or medium size business grappling with the basics, or a large or small business trying to understand its customer base. I will outline some of these good ones in another blog – or feel to connect with me. Feel free to offer your thoughts, favorites or other comments as well. I’d love to hear them!

To me, this has become an important topic and one that I’ve spent some time on, consulting on virtualization and cloud computing. For those that read Thomas Friedman’s, The World is Flat, you might recall that “Virtual” was mentioned as part of his 10th Flattener. But what he was really referring to is what I wrote about in my last blog – virtualizing meetings and trade shows.

On the other hand, and in the context of this blog, virtualization is a set of techniques, processes and a good dose of software applications that allow IT departments to slice and dice their computer hardware (primarily computers and servers) and data storage into smaller, separately managed logical servers and resources. To the average non-techy, this is about as intuitive as learning Greek.

So I won’t discuss the How of doing this, but rather the Why.  The Why is simply about being able to squeeze more out of your compute and data storage purchases by optimizing their capabilities. Sounds easy enough. And of course the followup question is ‘why doesn’t what we already do work as well as this technique’ - that being the purchase of one software server license per physical server. Let’s just say that this technology and its best practices have really matured in the past few years, and until now IT has not really felt safe in fully deploying virtualization to run the core business. That is changing, and in the land of IT today virtualization provides a good deal of cost savings, while preserving and extending your previous investments in technology. This is a key result in a world economy that values economizing like never before.

Virtualization can also be an important ingredient and is frequently associated with the infrastructure behind cloud computing. There’s a lot being discussed on this subject and some actual business and products being developed and road-mapped. But I’ll address the marketing and sales behind this in another blog - since this is a much broader topic. But suffice it to say, that cloud computing and virtualization often appear together in the same context. 

There are a few major players in this arena, VMware and Citrix (through its acquisition of Xen) are the big ones. VMware is the most dominant commercial vendor maintaining an approximate 55% market share, while Citrix had its roots in the open source arena and has maintained a smaller market share. Microsoft, Sun and others have valuable components and versions of their own that work primarily with their operating systems. And of course there is a substantial partner, channel and vendor ecosystem that has developed for this market. 

Since what goes on at the top of these companies is so critical, part of the sales and business maturity process have become evident in the leadership of these businesses. VMware, which was owned and now spun off by EMC, recently went through a change at the top, putting in place Paul Maritz, a mature and seasoned veteran of building organizations by replacing one of the original founders, Diane Greene.  Why…EMC still owns a majority of stock of VMware (was about 90%) and those shares will likely become more valuable in an untethered company, one that is not “totally” beholden to EMC technology.  Xen has been managed the last few years by Peter Levine, an old colleague of mine via a UNIX International committee in the early 90’s and a veteran of Veritas (now Symantec),  and Peter put his stamp of leadership on Xen by selling it to Citrix – and remaining with Citrix as their EVP. Why…Citrix is not only a much larger company but is one that is highly complimentary to Xen, providing much of the software that allows us to create virtual conferences and connect to our remote compute resources (Go ToMyPC).

Since I’ve attended both physical (real and in-person) trade shows and events and User Group meetings from VMware, as well as virtual trade shows and on-line webinars, I’ve been impressed by their attempts to put virtualization into a decent ROI sale context. This is one of the top two keys to selling most technology and I would say that VMware has created a reasonably well-refined ROI template that you can use to judge cost-benefits.

However, I think the ability to sell virtualization’s ease of management, and safety and reliability have been less evident. Indeed, VMware has to rely too often on its partners to supply necessary “fail-safe” technologies (backup, disaster recovery, etc) to complement its offerings. True, this is changing, but it has delayed virtualization’s adoption. When I started in this business, it was all about how to get to five 9’s (99.999% uptime), which equates to 5+ minutes of downtime per year as memory serves. Virtualization will surely head further upstream in the eyes of CIO’s with more fully demonstrable and certifiable studies of uptime, MTBF (mean time between failures) and the many other quality metrics associated with running a data center. And these measures of reliability have to be associated with the level of training, processes, and other investments in order for the virtualization vendors to make a fully vetted case and to ensure a faster sale’s close cycle. One suggestion - try giving us a chart with the number of 9’s versus the level of effort (time, money and people) that I have to put in to get to that level of uptime. That is the true benchmark of ROI vs. safety that will propel and sell this technology that much faster.

Another – try adding in elements of data storage and desktop virtualization into a comprehensive ROI model and safety equation, and maybe throw in a chart on application virtualization.

There’s clearly a lot that has evolved in getting wider spread sales and adoption of virtualization, but there’s still a lot to be improved upon.  I’d love to hear your thoughts on some additional ideas.