Paul Dunay is an award-winning B2B marketing expert with more than 20 years’ success in generating demand and creating awareness for leading technology, consumer products, financial services and professional services organizations.
Paul is the global vice president of marketing for Maxymiser a leading web optimization firm, and author of four “Dummies” books: Facebook Marketing for Dummies (Wiley 2009), Social Media and the Contact Center for Dummies (Wiley Custom Publishing 2010), Facebook Advertising for Dummies (Wiley 2010) and Facebook Marketing for Dummies 2nd Edition (Wiley 2011).
His unique approach to marketing has led to recognition of Paul as a BtoB Magazine Top 25 B2B Marketer of the Year for 2010 and 2009 and winner of the DemandGen Award for Utilizing Marketing Automation to Fuel Corporate Growth in 2008. He is also a finalist for the last six years in a row in the Marketing Excellence Awards competition of the Information Technology Services Marketing Association (ITSMA), and is a 2010 and 2005 gold award winner in Driving Demand.
Buzz Marketing for Technology, Paul’s blog, has been recognized as a Top 20 Marketing Blog for 2009 and 2008, a Top Blog to Watch for 2009 and 2008, and an Advertising Age Power 150 blog in the “Daily Ranking of Marketing Blogs.”
Paul has shared his marketing thought leadership as a featured speaker for the American Marketing Association, BtoB Magazine, CMO Club, MarketingProfs, Marketing Sherpa, Marketing Executives Networking Group (MENG), and ITSMA. He has appeared on Fox News, and his articles have been featured in BusinessWeek, The New York Times, BtoB Magazine, MarketingProfs and MarketingSherpa.
Paul holds an Executive Certificate in Strategy and Innovation from MIT’s Sloan School of Management and a bachelor’s degree in Marketing and Computer Science from Ithaca College.
"making it a requirement in your yearly performance review."… man what a buzz kill.
Paul – my take is a bit different. Only 1% will actively contribute. 9% will lurk. 90% will ignore. What that means is that you need a large enough group to form a critical mass. However, thinking of it as missing the 90% is not quite it. People will eventually adopt if it's useful. We just need to make sure it's useful even at 10%.
Paul – I think the "proper" split is different for different technologies. 1-9-90 might be ok for an internal wiki. I would say it is the lowest level of "ok", but as the collaborative exchanges are different, the split is as well. Agreed though that for the microblogging crowd 1-9-90 is not ideal.
@ Alan – sorry but you know .. you get what you measure
@ Tony – great point and that the 10% needs to be sizable enough to make it active and engaging!
@ Nate – agreed different tech have different rates of adoption and (what I am hearing) is that the expectation of a "collaboration" site is different than that of say a "microblogging" site
@ Nate – hope you are doing well …
I think what you have said is very much right.I am totally agree with Nate that 1-9-90 might be ok for an internal wiki.
Productivity of internal (and external collaboration) is in the people, their connections and what they do with it. Wiki. other technologies and percentage of contribution are interesting parts, yet secondary.
More on why a wiki will not make your business collaborative, and why Sharepoint is not social (connect people, not documents).
Click my screen name for the link.
Paul, I think you have a good point. However, social media does follow the cool kids table at lunch phenomenon. If the cool kids get on, others will follow. In corporate America the cool kids are the executives. Get an organizations executive team using it to: Give kudos, ask for input, respond to someone else's request for input, share corporate news, etc. and the minions will follow.
If you can get the execs to use it AND engage, you will see adoption go through the roof. Everyone wants to sit at the cool kids table.
@Seonext – thanks for commenting
@CoCreatr – its a good point – just because you have a wiki doesnt mean you are collaborating!
@Jim – really great point Jim and a great way to fight that 1-9-90 dynamic within a company – evidenced by a firm like Zappos – now if we could only get the CEO to start adopting these kinds of technologies we would be all set 😉
Hi Paul, from my experience in implementing wikis specifically (can't say the same for Yammer), as long as the organisation and the managers provide a reason for employees to contribute, its more like 90% will use it and 9% will ignore.
For example, if deliverables are required to be collaborated, discussed and submitted online via the wiki, then employees will have to use it. Some might argue that's not very web 2.0 which I do agree but isn't web 2.0 something that users have to experience before they really understand how to use it?
The success of a web 2.0 platform (internal or external) is about scaling and the more users, the merrier.
@ Sean – I agree the success of a wiki is in the "network" the more the better and I like your idea about creating collaboration moments by posting items to the wiki
thanks for commenting
Though your rule might be correct in certain instances, I've seen where context is key towards adoption and participation. I've implemented a microblogging tool for a large healthcare provider, and by placing it on the main page of the corporate Intranet site, it guaranteed all users would view the content, and increased participation dramatically. Its like taking out a full page ad on the front page of a newspaper…you're guaranteeing a reaction. Check out an independent case study performed on this topic:
http://tinyurl.com/kl8vfw
@David
Thanks for commenting! – will check out the case study
p
Paul – I question the "mandatory" approach. I would rather see the ease-of-use and compelling value drive the adoption. Just like developing good online service, internal collaboration implementations need to see what works and continue to improve. Yes measure, but measure the adoption, the usefulness and figure out where to improve the usage or the process – engage your internal audience on how to make it better. don't we ask companies to engage their external audience? Measuring use in the review process is a heavy stick that will drive resentment, not real improvement and adoption.
@Sherrick – I had a great conversation with Eugene Lee the CEO of SocialText yesterday about the same concept of mandatory vs value based adoption in the enterprise.
He was very persuasive on the point of adoption being voluntary in order for it to have true staying power in the enterprise. He mentioned a forth coming white paper on the topic you should check out
Hope all is well with you and thanks for your insightful comment!
I noticed your website when I was browsing for something not related at all, but this post came up as a top result, your site must be amazingly popular! Continue the good work!
@Judith – wow that is powerful content – if it is showing up on that site – thank you for sharing this with me!!