Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Stakeholder

Writing Tips for Corporate Recruitment Sites

Words really are the only way to tell a story, but they aren’t easy tools to manipulate. Copy on corporate recruitment sites tends to fall into two categories; either bland and clichéd, or overdone and clichéd—which could be enough to put potential candidates off applying.

Making best use of your web capital isn’t easy, but it is important. Here are a few ideas for getting across what you want to convey on your recruitment pages:

Be Economical With Language

We all remember that first time as a student we were faced with twenty-five pages on some thoroughly uninteresting subject. People will not read much more than five-hundred words on any webpage, so say what you have to say in as few words as possible. Long, dynamic sentences with lots of punctuation and clever metaphors, just like those you would find in a novel, are a bit tedious online.

Punctuate Thoughtfully

Punctuation does two things: it shows that you can write coherently and have a good understanding of English; secondly it is vital for getting your meaning across. If you’re someone who is happier writing a bulleted memo or crunching numbers than putting prose together, why not hire a copywriter? It’s one more job off your hands.

Concentrate your Meaning

Before starting copy for any webpage, write down exactly what you want to say on a notebook. It can be too easy to rattle off all the fantastic reasons why your company is a great place to work, but if it isn’t coherent it will look more like a shopping list than a recruitment site. If you have lots to say, use lots of different pages rather than long lists on one page.

Avoid Metaphors, Similes and Idioms

We all learnt at school that metaphors and similes are clever ways of spicing up your writing, but unless they’re used sparingly they’ll sink like lead. Metaphors can just sound cheesy, and often they don’t help to get any more meaning across.

Think about Tone

You don’t want to be too corporate, unless that is the nature of your business, but you also don’t want to be sloppy and overly-friendly. Both will give the wrong impression about what you’re looking for which, for most firms, is a rounded, balanced individual. Your tone is important so use it wisely.

Once you’ve got your copy down, make sure you proofread it thoroughly. Your corporate web space is an invaluable asset so make sure you use it to best effect.

Taxonomy of Ad Agency Names – Which Brands Get It Right?

If ad agencies provide creative and tactical branding services, then it stands to reason that they should be well-branded themselves. That’s not always the case. Often ad agency names are the product of mergers and acquisitions or agencies are named after the founder, which gives the agency brand a boring, stale, and often out-dated image.

Of course, the largest and most successful agencies that grew over time have had opportunities to create their brand images to become the well-known brands that they are today — or have they? It creates an interesting question. Is it time for some ad agencies to rebrand?

The creative team of Rob Donaldson and Joe Dennett put together an infographic that helps put things into perspective. Take a look at the Taxonomy of Advertising Agency Names below, which breaks agency naming conventions down into seven primary categories (in order of popularity):

  1. Founders: Crispin Porter and Bogusky, Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, Carmichael Lynch, and so on
  2. Living things: David & Goliath, Dinosaur, Razorfish, and so on
  3. Inanimate objects: Crayon, Viral Factory, and so on
  4. Places: Gotham Inc., Agency Republic, Hometown, and so on
  5. Physical or metaphysical attributes: Atomic, Dare, Anomaly, and so on
  6. Abstract concepts: Now, Proximity, Karmarama, and so on
  7. Alphanumeric: 4Creative, 101, BBDO, and so on

Many of the ad agency names on the infographic could appear in multiple categories. For example, BBDO is in the Alphanumeric category and the Founders category. While all agencies don’t appear on the infographic, the taxonomy could likely cover just about every ad agency name that you can think of.

Click the image to view the full-size infographic at the source.

Taxonomy of Ad Agency Names Infographic

Which ad agency names do you think are also powerful brand names? Which could use a rebranding? It’s interesting to turn the conversation about the importance of branding back to the agencies that create brands and brand messages for their clients every day. The lesson to learn is this — don’t get stuck in a rut with a brand name that evolved over time and is more cumbersome than valuable.

Image: Rob & Joe

The Link of Least Resistance: The Psychology of Clicking Behavior

psychology of the easy choice


There are certain behaviors that are universal for all human beings, one of these being our tendency to behave in ways that preserve energy. For example, most of us opt to use the elevator instead of choosing to huff and puff our way up the stairs. Or, run the search term ‘time management tips’ through the Google search engine; the list of over 307,000,000 results will provide direct evidence that we strive to spend the least amount of time and resources as possible on nearly every task we encounter.

Just as humans don’t particularly enjoy using energy on stairs, we also take on energy-saving behavior when it comes to exploring a webpage. Recent research connects a classic, time-tested psychological principle called the Primacy Effect with user interface behavior.[1]

The Primacy Effect explains how, when given a list of items to remember, we tend to remember the first several items more than those at the middle or end of the list. This principle also states that we tend believe that the items at the beginning of a list are more important, credible, and significant than the remaining items on the list.[2]

Clicking behavior, or the act of choosing to ‘click’, or select, a particular link, has been likened to an animal foraging for food. Just as animals scour their territory for food, so do users scour a website for profitable links.  When an animal forages for food, the calories used during the search cannot exceed the amount of calories the food provides. Likewise, users tend to click the link that costs the least amount of energy, or the link of least resistance.[3]

Just as animals strive to save physical energy, humans strive to save cognitive, or mental, energy. Believe it or not, the instantaneous time it takes for a user to read link descriptions and select a link costs mental energy. Research indicates that users utilize the Primacy Effect when selecting links; they select links located in positions that take less mental energy.

Researchers from the University of Western Australia and Florida State University listed a series of links on a Southeastern U.S. hospitality website and measured the amount and location of clicks. The results indicated that the top left column was the most popular place for clicks (primacy effect), with the large majority of users clicking links in this region as opposed to the lower right column.[4]

This study, coupled with subsequent research investigations yielding the same findings, indicates the importance of link position in click-through rates.  Users seem to perceive that links located at the top left corner of a webpage require less mental capital than those located lower on the web page. Researchers offer the explanation that English and most other languages flow from left to right, and from top to bottom. Thus, it makes sense that the first item in a list located at the top left corner the page would be the most popular as this has the lowest search cost, making it the easiest link to click.

In sum, the Primacy Effect should be taken into consideration in the development of corporate websites. It is wise to put the most important or lucrative links first in a menu, and to place this menu on the left-hand side of the page. By doing so, you are saving your visitors energy, energy that can instead be applied to reading about your product or service.

Resources:

1 Murphy, Hofacker, & Mizerski: Primacy and recency effects on clicking behavior

2 Asch, S. E.: Forming impressions of personality

3 Pirolli & Card:Information foraging

4 Hofacker & Murphy: Using server log files and online experiments to enhance Internet marketing

Attracting Speculative Applications Through Social Media

speculative application


The demands of twenty-first century businesses aren’t always easy to forecast and keeping your workforce flexible is one of the most effective ways of meeting the needs of clients. Of course, orchestrating this can be a challenge and it’s practically very difficult to balance recruitment with traditional graduate cycles. This is exactly why firms should be looking to attract speculative job applications wherever possible, and what better way to do that than through social media?

Check out your Web Copy

First things first: look at what you already have on your website. Two lines can make all the difference, and if there’s a relevant and current contact for potential applicants to get in touch with, it signals you’re not only open to speculative applications, but you might be willing to take on an intern or even a graduate.

Call for Applications

Don’t be afraid to use Twitter or Facebook to advertise vacancies of just a few weeks, but you should be a bit more careful when looking for longer term staff and make sure your adverts are around long enough to attract a broad range of applicants. You will also need to be sure your applicants get a fair and consistent interview.

Be Specific

Recruiting through social media remains a bit unorthodox as it is, so don’t be afraid to move away from the traditional CV and cover letter. Ask for something that’s really relevant to your company, perhaps a portfolio or even a mock-report. It’s through these pieces of work that you’ll be able to gauge whether an applicant is worth calling.

Keep Hold of Details

Speculative applications are what they are, and people really expect to be rejected. However, not today doesn’t mean not at all, and it’s definitely worth keeping good applicants on file. Equally, a call to let them know that’s what you’re doing will help to keep relations good.

Make Sure You’re Upfront

The speculative applicant could come from anywhere and, after all, be after anything. Don’t expect your intentions to be the same and be clear about what you’re offering in terms of time required, salary and location from the off. All too often applicants are offered roles, only to find they’re unpaid and eventually they end up rejecting them.

A good through-flow of speculative applications is a great way of keeping your workforce flexible and it encourages new ideas, new talents and maybe even new employees. Use the talent and the tools that are out there; you’ve nothing to lose!

10 Most Hated Companies in America for 2012 Revealed

jc penney may book coverThe 2012 list of the 10 most hated companies in America from 24/7 Wall St. includes some repeat offenders as well as some newcomers. Each of these companies successfully angered their customers, employees, and shareholders in comparison to similar companies and the broader market during 2012.

Suffice it to say, these companies have made some big mistakes. The question is whether or not they can fix those mistakes and get off of this list for 2013. Based on the success of companies like Netflix, which appeared on the 2011 list as the tenth most hated company in America but did not make the 2012 list, there is still hope for each of these companies. Whether or not they can regain the brand value that has been lost remains to be seen.

Other companies that managed to avoid this list in 2012 but appeared on it in 2011 include AT&T (#3 in 2011), Goldman Sachs (#5 in 2011), Best Buy (#6 in 2011), Bank of America (#7 in 2011), and Johnson & Johnson (#8 in 2011). Companies that were not able to redeem themselves and appear on the list again in 2012 include Facebook (#1 in 2011 and #4 in 2012), American Airlines (#2 in 2011 and #7 in 2012), Nokia (#4 in 2011 and #8 in 2012), and Sears Holding Corp. (#9 in 2011 and 2012). Newcomers include J.C. Penney (#1 in 2012), Dish Network Corp. (#2 in 2012), T-Mobile USA (#3 in 2012), Citigroup Inc. (#5 in 2012), Research in Motion Ltd. (#6 in 2012), and Hewlett-Packard (#10 in 2012).

Douglas A. McIntyre and Michael B. Sauter of 24/7 Wall St. explain some of the reasons why the companies on the 2012 list made it to the top 10:

1. J.C. Penney: Sales dropped by 20% after the new CEO, Ron Johnson, implemented a new store design and pricing policy. Sales are still declining, and J.C. Penney stock has dropped by 40% since Johnson took on his leadership role in November 2011.

2. Dish Network Corp.: Terrible customer service and low employee ratings about their experiences working for Dish Network Corp. were the primary reasons this company took the #2 position.

3. T-Mobile USA: Poor customer service and poor wireless service performance caused more than 1.5 million customers to leave T-Mobile USA in 2012.

4. Facebook Inc.: An IPO that will go down in history as a huge disappointment, falling stock prices, customer dissatisfaction, and customer privacy concerns caused Facebook to stay on the list of the 10 most hated companies in America for another year.

5. Citigroup Inc.: Massive layoffs of thousands of employees and poor relationships with customers caused Citigroup to lose 12% of its brand value in 2012 according to Interbrand and landed it on the list of most hated companies in America.

6. Research in Motion Ltd.: Once the smartphone leader, RIM’s market share has dropped to 7.3% in the United States and keeps going lower. Layoffs, disasterous product launches (and delays), and layoffs caused RIM to lose 20% of its share price in 2012 (80% in the last two years) and 39% of its brand value (according to Interbrand).

7. American Airlines: Bankruptcy filing, cutting financial obligations, failing to meet pilot demands, laying off a huge number of employees, and having the “rudest employees” all played a part in landing American Airlines on the list of the most hated companies in America again this year.

8. Nokia: Once the largest handset company, Nokia now trails its competitors like Apple and Samsung. As a result, the stock price was down 20% in 2012 and 60% over the past two years. Interbrand reports that the Nokia brand lost 16% of its value in 2012.

9. Sears Holding Corp.: Stock price has dropped by 60% during the past five years and the company keeps losing money while top competitors like Target and Walmart keep growing. Customers and employees are also dissatisfied with Sears.

10. Hewlett-Packard: Hewlett-Packard shares fell by 40% in the past year. The company continues to lose money and laid off nearly 30,000 people in 2012.

You can get all of the details about why these companies landed on the list of the top 10 most hated companies in America on 24/7 Wall St.

Which companies do you think can make a comeback, revitalize brand perceptions, and get off of the list in 2013? Which do you think are in serious trouble? Leave a comment and share your thoughts.

Image: J.C. Penney

Brand Websites Aren’t Close to Dead Yet

website wwwHave you heard the claim that brand websites are dead? It’s usually followed by a sentence like, “Facebook is the only place brands need to be,” or something similar.

The reality is that brand websites are just as important as they ever were before, if not even more important. Brands don’t control Facebook, but they do control their websites. Which would you rather have as your brand’s core branded online destination?

Don’t believe it? The proof that brand websites aren’t close to dead yet can be found in research statistics.

A recent study by nRelate found that while brand websites might not get as much traffic as other social sites, brand websites are still the most popular place for consumers who are actively looking for information about products and the companies that make those products. As eMarketer explains, “No other content type approached the trustworthiness of corporate sites according to [the nRelate] survey–not even mainstream news sites.

Here is the breakdown from the study showing the online content U.S. online shoppers trust when researching products to buy as reported in the nRelate survey:

  1. Manufacturer/brand website = 48%
  2. Article I found using a search engine = 34%
  3. Expert on a topic related to that product = 31%
  4. Mainstream news site = 22%
  5. Link a friend posted to a social network = 12%
  6. Blog = 11%
  7. Link found in a display ad = 4%
  8. Other = 11%
  9. Don’t trust online content = 6%

It’s interesting to note that when you add the online content sources identified above, more than 80% of consumers indicated that they trusted content that they most likely found through search, earned media, social media, and word-of-mouth marketing. In other words, don’t undervalue the importance of social media marketing and search engine optimization in your marketing plan, but those things are just parts of the greater picture.

Brand websites are not dead and won’t be for a very long time. The traffic might not be as high as a brand’s Facebook Page, but the experience visitors have on brand websites still needs to be amazing. People who visit a brand website are more often than not actively seeking information about that brand and its products. This is a targeted and fairly prequalified audience that should be nurtured with great content, a fantastic user experience, and an amazing brand experience.

It’s easy to let the brand website maintenance and updates fall down on the priority list, but this is a mistake. Your brand website is a window into your business and should deliver the same kind of experience to consumers that they would get if they walked into a brick-and-mortar location that represents your brand. Don’t disappoint them, because they’re unlikely to return if they’re not happy — and they’ll probably share their disappointment with other people using social media. In other words, their disappointment will spread and cleaning up skewed perceptions is harder than massaging perceptions in the “right” direction in the first place.

Image: Anna Maria Lopez