a digital product firm

The ‘Process’ Category

Living With Variable Pricing – Day 1

Wednesday, October 6th, 2010

Yesterday we launched our variable rate pricing. The purpose of the program is to create a public indicator of how busy we are in such a way that allows clients with potential projects can take that into account. If we’re not busy, our rate will reflect that and hopefully encourage people to start new work with us, or get into a deeper engagement without increasing their costs. On the other hand, if we’re very busy, we can signal that by an increase in our rate.

We wanted to have a way of varying this rate that was as objective as possible, so we’re basing changes in our rate on how “utilized” we are. Based on our histories working for various agencies, we set our sights somewhat arbitrarily on an ideal utilization of 80%, and decided that anything plus or minus ten percentage points was probably what we could consider “optimal”.

So, if we’re working within this target, our rate stays the same. If we fall below, our rate falls, and if we shoot over the top, our rate rises ($1 a day in either case). We’re also upping our rate $1 for every serious inquiry we get for new work. Simple as that.

So what has this meant for us so far?

First, deciding what is, and is not, “utilized”. Now that we have established a range of utilization that we want to be within, we need to decide what actually counts as being utilized. So far, this has been fairly straightforward: work on billable projects is clearly utilized; work on getting a billable project defined, signed, and running also seems utilized; business development work for our business development guy (@verymickey, contact him if you’re interested in doing business with us ;) is utilized; internal administration is not utilized; and writing for the blog, looking at our analytics, and most biz dev work for everyone but Mickey seems like non-utilized. There are some grey areas, like do we count it as utilized if Justin goes to a meeting with Mickey to talk to a potential client. We’re going with our gut on these (it does count), and so far they seem easy enough to resolve.

Second, a strong incentive to fill out timesheets. We’re pulling our utilization numbers daily based on our timesheets (we use Harvest, in case you’re interested). Since the rate that we charge is directly affected by this, it becomes a pretty good motivator (especially for those of us who struggle to get our time in). Also, since someone is looking at this data every day and taking action based on it, it adds meaning to the task as well. The upshot of all of this is even more detailed reporting on projects in the future.

Third, an evaluation of whether or not 80% utilized is actually optimal. A question that’s starting to surface is whether, given our definitions of what is and is not considered “utilized”, is 80% the right number. We may find out that we do a lot of non-utilized work and that if we also did 80% utilized work, we’d struggle to keep up. We may also find that 70% is not enough or 90% is too much. This may mean that we have to look at changing the target range to more accurately reflect reality. It’s too soon to tell yet, but we’re certainly paying a lot more attention to this.

Fourth, some questions, and some directional answers. We received a few questions about the program pretty much right away (in fact, we got more than a few questions even before we launched). This is great, of course. It’s an experiment for us, and we welcome questions, opinions, and advice. We launched this experiment to see what we could learn from it, so we’re doing a lot of “yeah, that’s a good question” right now. Sorry for that. Hopefully as we get farther into this, we’ll have more definitive answers to share.

The Naked Numbers

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

This is part of a series of articles about how Fight is approaching using some free advertising. It all kicks off here.

The advertising portion of the Naked Campaign has now drawn to a close.

We divide the execution of a project (versus the strategizing portion) into 5 stages: Execution Planning, Running the Project, Analysis, and Adjustment.

Since we’ve finished running the project, it’s time for some analysis. Here’s a quick it on the base metrics that we were tracking, with more to follow.

Unfortunately, we ultimately had to throw out all of the Google AdWords data from before 20th as it looks like the click fraud that we were experiencing went all the way back to the beginning of the campaign :( So here’s the adjusted data starting at the 9th of July for LinkedIn’s DirectAds, and the 20th for Google’s AdWords:

DirectAds Spend: $199.24
DirectAds Impressions: 104,229
DirectAds Clicks: 38 (0.036% Click Rate)

AdWords Impressions: 116,092
AdWords Clicks: 78 (0.067% Click Rate)

Twitter Followers (current, all types): 295 (+14% since start)
RSS Followers (7 day avg): 15 (-17%)
Unique Visitors (30 days): 547 (+2.4%)
Comments (campaign, total): 0

I’ll do a deeper dive into the numbers over the next few days, and then we’ll go into the Adjustment stage and see what this all means for Fight moving forward.

Goals and Baseline for the Naked Campaign

Monday, July 12th, 2010

This is part of a series of articles about how Fight is approaching using some free advertising. It all kicks off here.

Goals

A key piece of information that you’ll want to know for our Naked Campaign is what our goals are (this is typically the first thing that we set up on a regular client engagement). Having goals is critical because that is what lets you know whether you have actually done good work or not (all of us at Fight have worked on award-winning projects that never actually accomplished what they should have).

Given that we’re a high-consideration good, and that windows of opportunity with the potential clients that we hope to reach are rare, our primary goal is to get people to subscribe to the ongoing content that Fight produces. This content comes primarily in the form of a blog (which you are currently reading), and our company Twitter account. So the primary goal can be stated as:

Goal #1: Increase the number of people subscribed to Fight content

As a secondary goal, if we can’t get people regularly engaged in our content, we at least want more people to have heard about Fight and know what it is that we do. That goal can be stated as:

Goal #2: Increase the number of people aware of Fight

Metrics

You may notice that for Goal #1 there is no specific amount that we’re trying to increase subscriptions by (which we would normally establish for a campaign like this). This is because this will have been the first real marketing push that we’ve done for Fight. As such, we will be looking to establish a baseline from which we can measure future campaigns. We’ll do this by both looking at what the total increases that we’ve gained through this program, and looking at the increases versus the cost to get those increases so that we can compare that with other approaches down the line.

Of course, we have a starting number of people subscribed to our RSS feed for the blog and our Twitter account, so this is what we’ll be building on.

For Twitter, as of the writing of this article, we have 176 direct followers. We are also on 16 lists which have 82 additional followers combined, for a total of 258 followers on Twitter.

We only recently started running our RSS feed through Feedburner, so it’s not clear how many people are actually following us this way, but a 7 day rolling average shows about 18 subscribers as of this writing (we use a 7 day average because Feedburner numbers vary heavily from day to day).

For Goal #2, we’re also setting a baseline, but things are a bit trickier. If we were operating from any kind of real budget, we’d do periodic surveying against our target audience to see what the uptick in awareness was, or we’d do surveys of people exposed versus not exposed to see what the lift was, but these are outside of the scope of our current budget, so we’re going to have to measure awareness by proxy.

For this goal our proxy metric will be unique site visitors during the campaign, averaged over 30 days. We could use ad impressions here, but for our purposes, they’re a pretty weak indicator of awareness, so we’ve opted to assume that if they actually click through to the site, they have a base level of awareness. Google Analytics tells us that our baseline is 534 unique visitors in the last 30 days.

So there you have it. In upcoming entries, we’ll show you the ads that we are running, the keywords we chose for AdWords, and we’ll look at some A/B testing on the landing page. And, of course, we’ll update with stats as we get them in, and let you know what changes in approach (if any) we’ve taken based on that information.

We’d love for you to jump into the conversation below. I’m guessing no small number of you have suggestions for how we should proceed, or what we should have done to begin with. Let us have it! And if you have questions about how or why we’re doing something, we’re happy to provide that info as well.

Tune in next time!

An Update on The 30 Coffees Project

Friday, March 5th, 2010

You may or may not know that in February, Fight kicked off its 30 Coffees project. 30 coffees is an idea conjured up by Fight partner, Rob Shields, and at its heart it’s a simple social web exercise. As Rob said at the beginning – “Fight has an awesome community of supporters, so we thought: Who better to turn to to help us make a good thing better? We believe that Fight is a different kind of company from other marketing strategy firms, and we’d like to get some practice talking about ourselves to people in the business, marketing, and agency worlds so that when we talk to potential clients we can really shine.”

I have already met with 16 people since we started, and along the way the concept became elastic enough to include meetings I have had with some of the heads of Portland’s advertising and marketing agencies. It’s been a fascinating discussion, and I stress the word discussion as this was never intended to be an opportunity to pitch people, it is intended to help Fight form its own internal and external narrative. The feedback from the talks has been extremely useful. And more importantly, by the end of the project [it looks like it may run over a bit because of scheduling plus my speaking engagement at SXSW,] I am certain we will have honed our story along with our elevator pitch, and have them nailed down. 14 more to go and then I will be writing up the whole endeavor very soon…

I wish to say thanks to the first set of participants. I’ve included their Twitter accounts where possible, so if you use Twitter I encourage you to follow these good people:

Erik Johnson
David Burn @davidburn
Brandon Schoessler @transport_1
Denny Mcentire @dfatouchi
Dian Crawford @diancrawford
Aaron Day
Jennifer Day-Burget @portlandwater
Jennie Fitzhugh @sasquatcha
Stephen Landau @stlandau
Ed Borasky @znmeb
Bryan Rhoads @bryanrhoads
Jay Cosnett @jaycosnett
Amanda Bernard
Jim Woolfrey @informative
Charlie Quirk @CharlieQuirk
Emanuel Brown @emanuelbrown

And honorable mentions to the following for being involved, somewhat unwittingly!

Ashly Stewart @AshlyStewart
David Ewald @motorcoatdave
Justin Yeun @jyuen
Rebecca Armstrong @rebeccamary
Arve Overland @ArveOverland
Jerry Ketel @JerryKetel
Dennis Hahn

Process 1.0

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

[Note: The title of this page ("Process") has a number after it to indicate that the way we talk about our process - and perhaps the process itself - will change over time.  We encourage you to put your thoughts, suggestions, questions, or challenges (be firm, but don't be a jerk) in the comments and let's discuss.  Periodically we'll incorporate changes into a new version of this document, and the process can begin again.  We're strong believers in learning and then doing better; here's a chance for you to participate in that process.]

We are not big believers in the Hail Mary pass as a strategy for success.

You have no doubt seen this in the form of the “big idea”. That idea that is so beautiful, if only because of its sheer magnitude, that whatever your goals are, they must surely come true.

Hail Mary passes may be fine when the risk is low or the project is small, but when you are spending real money, that’s a whole different game.

Our approach is to establish a solid foundation for the project, create an insightful strategy, outline an operationalizable roadmap, and then run the project in a series of iterations. At the beginning of each iteration, we do some bit of work with the express purpose of learning something specific from it. At the end of the iteration, we evaluate what was learned and adjust the strategy as necessary.

 Fight Process Overview

Each iteration tests a part of the strategy, and each iteration builds on the previous one, enabling the strategy to become more efficient at maximizing the goals of the project with every iteration.

Each iteration ends with a refined roadmap for moving the project forward, and an increasingly solid strategic case for doing so.