Ugh. I hate that question. It presumes that my occupation is my sole function in life. Curiously, I’ve noticed that people respond to this question differently, within the context of their j-o-b.
Some folks identify with their job function above all else. ‘I’m in sales’ or ‘I’m in marketing’ is their response. Their contribution to their company is how they view themselves within an organization. Presumably, this answer is given by anyone who has worked for a number of years within their field for several different employers.
Others prefer to state that they belong to the organization itself. These people answer with ‘I work at Yahoo!’ or ‘I work at IN-N-OUT.’ When the company name is their trump card, there is often a sense of pride in working there (ask any Yahoo!), or that particular organization is known by most consumers.
Then there are the rare pedigree members of the work force that have studied a vocation they now practice. For the rest of us bourgeois, this includes anyone who tells you ‘I am a lawyer’ or ‘I am a photographer’ or even ‘I am a plumber’ – their trade was a learned one. These types of occupations are the noun form of the job verb they practice. Does that make sense?
Finally there those of us (including me) that strongly identify with the industry we are a part of. ‘I am in the tech industry’ or ‘I work in the web 2.0 space’ is what I often find myself saying when asked that eye rolling question. This is obviously the most umbrella answer – as I could be the CEO of a company or answer the phone at the front desk. It merely connotates being in the ‘biz.
I wonder if my answer will start to evolve as my career goes on its natural path. Now that it’s something I’ve noticed, I’ll definitely be keeping an ear out.
Categories: Corporate Culture
Tagged: IN-N-OUT, J-O-B, job function, occupation, web 2.0
I spoke today with the Director of Marketing of a web content management organization. We had a really good chat about the two distinctly different ways companies can approach this web 2.0 thing, and wanted to share them with you.
1. 1. Operationally: how does this change my IT department’s functionality? Our network? Our licensing?
2. 2. The CMO’s Perspective: ultimately how do I promote my brand value? There’s a couple of things to consider under this angle:
A) Brand experience / emotional connection
B) Unique differentiator within the market
C) How do I ensure I am what my buyers want? How do I remain niche?
D) Supply chain
E) Here’s the doozy: Digital Interaction
The digital interaction portion of the perspective is the tricky part, especially as the market becomes more web 2.0 savvy.
He shared a story with me about one of his colleagues who was driving with his 12 year old daughter on the way to soccer practice. He asked her what she thought he should get her Mother for her birthday. The daughter replied that Dad should buy Mom an iPod, as Mom was forever borrowing hers.
Dad asked her if she thought it might be better to get a Microsoft Zune, which he’d seen heavily advertised. His daughter rolled her eyes and told her Father that he obviously didn’t know anything about marketing. Dad laughed and asked her what she meant. His daughter replied that if you have to advertise a product, it’s obviously not very good.
From a 12 year old’s perspective, conventional marketing methods are trite and forced - they no longer engage but rather make pathetic attempts to grab attention. Media has changed so much, and it seems the youth almost have a better grasp on what works and what doesn’t.
Categories: Uncategorized
Tagged: marketing, media, web 2.0, Zune
