ReputationDefender Blog recently came across this article at SMEweb.com that underscores the power of reputation in the business world. The piece states that customers will pay more money to businesses and brands that they think well of, improving profitability for firms that are well regarded by the public.

Well over half of consumers will pay a premium to the company they believe has the best reputation, even if they can buy a product or service cheaper elsewhere.

Excellent customer service was cited by almost half of all respondents (48 per cent) in a new CBI survey as the characteristic that most helps a firm build its reputation. Another third (36 per cent) said that products and services always living up to expectations mattered most. Seven per cent said a good reputation was down to being a good employer while four per cent attributed it to brand appeal.

[SNIP]

Among the 58 per cent of consumers willing to pay more to their most highly regarded company, 43 per cent would pay up to five per cent over and above a cheaper price, almost a third (29 per cent) are happy to pay six to ten per cent more, while a one in six (16 per cent) would pay more than a ten per cent premium.

Richard Lambert, the CBI’s director-general, said, “What comes through in our survey is that great reputations rest or fall on delivery. Whether the promise is of quality, fun, value or luxury, the 21st century customer is savvy enough to sniff out and avoid the shoddy or disappointing. Environmental credentials and social responsibility are also becoming increasingly more important to consumers’ purchasing decisions.”

Managing how you are perceived online is especially important in the digital age. Companies looking to improve their bottom line and word of mouth branding should utilize Online Reputation Management to optimize their online presence. ReputationDefender remains the leader in the Online Reputation Management field and our reputation specialists are happy to provide corporations Business Insurance for the Web ^TM.

Bookmark It

ReputationDefender Blog has written extensively on Online Privacy Protection and how a social, shared, online existence is leading to increased privacy concerns and the need to proactively manage one’s Online Reputation.

TechCrunch has an interesting study up today that documents Flickr Privacy settings across the world. It looks like unless you are in Utah, Americans enjoy sharing their photos with everyone online. Quoting from the page:

[image]

This picture was presented by Elizabeth Churchill, Principal Research Scientist at Yahoo at a meeting I am attending today. It shows the privacy settings of a sample of a million Flickr users from 2005. Red spots note users who have photo sharing turned off (private), green shows users who have photo sharing turned on (public).

The results are fascinating. The US is widely public except for users who seem to be hovering around Utah, and varies by state. Europe, by contrast, is largely private, and more so as you move north. The Middle East is wide open. South East Asia is mixed. India is private.

ReputationDefender is the leader in Online Privacy and managing professional identities online. Check out MyPrivacy and learn how to remove personal information from the internet. Join the Global Do Not Call List today.

Bookmark It

ReputationDefender Blog found a recent survey at MSNBC that highlights what most of us (at least in tech-central Silicon Valley) have known for some time: email is absolutely vital to being competitive and in touch. But the study also found that those advantages come with a cost: namely, work-life balance.

A study published Wednesday by the Pew Internet and American Life Project shows that workers in general have mixed feelings about the increased use of e-mail and the Internet in the last few years.

In a survey of 2,134 adults in March and April, 96 percent used e-mail, the Internet or cell phones. Of them, 80 percent said these technologies have improved their ability to do their jobs, and 58 percent said these tools have given them more control over when to work.

But 46 percent also said these devices increase the demands that they work more hours, and 49 percent said that the technologies make it harder to disconnect from work when they should be off.

Half of the respondents who were employed and had e-mail said they check their work e-mail on weekends, and a full 22 percent said they checked office e-mail “often” on the weekends, up from 16 percent who said the same thing in 2002.

Much of the increase can be attributed to increased use of wireless e-mail devices like the BlackBerry, made by Research in Motion Ltd. Of those who have such gadgets, 40 percent say they often check work e-mail on weekends. A quarter often check in even when on vacation.

This writer can certainly attest to the proclivity of checking work email while on vacation. In fact, during a recent trip to Central Europe I had the distinct “pleasure” of attempting to establish a wireless network in a family apartment while trying to sort through Finnish, Serbian, Czech and Hungarian instructions for the devices involved so I could do just that. What do you think? Is email making us more productive or more stressed at work?

Bookmark It

The Chicago Tribune has a piece out this week that shows college admissions officers are disqualifying applicants based on material that they find online. Sought after schools are using sites like MySpace and Facebook to learn more about students.

The idea that a lapse in cyber-judgment could alter a life trajectory might once have been dismissed as paranoia.

But with some admissions officers confirming in a new survey that they visit social-networking sites, high schoolers say getting into college is no longer only about sky-high test scores and impressive extracurricular activities. Now it means being smart about their online personas as well.

In a new survey, 10 percent of admissions officers from prestigious schools said they had peeked at sites like Facebook and MySpace to evaluate college-bound seniors. Of those using the profiles, 38 percent said it had a “negative impact” on the applicant, according to Kaplan Inc., the education services company that polled the officers.

[SNIP]

With colleges expecting a record number of applications this year, the survey results should serve as a wake-up call for both students and parents, he said.

“Today’s application is not just what you send . . . but whatever they can Google about you,” Olson said.

This illustrates the importance of cultivating a positive online reputation. Students, job seekers and executives are learning that people make judgments based on what they find on Google and Social Networking Sites. And teachers? You have to watch what you place online, as well.

Bookmark It

ReputationDefender Blog recently ran across this physorg article that identifies narcissistic online profiles, as well as the emerging field of online psychology. The article quotes a recent University of Georgia study that looked at Facebook profiles.

The researchers found that the number of Facebook friends and wallposts that individuals have on their profile pages correlates with narcissism. Buffardi said this is consistent with how narcissists behave in the real-world, with numerous yet shallow relationships. Narcissists are also more likely to choose glamorous, self-promoting pictures for their main profile photos, she said, while others are more likely to use snapshots.

Untrained observers were able to detect narcissism, too. The researchers found that the observers used three characteristics – quantity of social interaction, attractiveness of the individual and the degree of self promotion in the main photo – to form an impression of the individual’s personality. “People aren’t perfect in their assessments,” Buffardi said, “but our results show they’re somewhat accurate in their judgments.”

Narcissism is a trait of particular interest, Campbell said, because it hampers the ability form healthy, long-term relationships. “Narcissists might initially be seen as charming, but they end up using people for their own advantage,” Campbell said. “They hurt the people around them and they hurt themselves in the long run.”

[SNIP]

“We’ve undergone a social change in the last four or five years and now almost every student manages their relationships through Facebook – something that few older people do,” Campbell said. “It’s a completely new social world that we’re just beginning to understand.” 

It is clear that people develop a reputation online based on where they post, who they poke and how they present themselves. It is interesting that even untrained observers were able to identify narcissists by looking at their Facebook profiles. This shows that while online psychology and sociology are incipient sciences, people are easily able to understand social and psychological cues online.

ReputationDefender wants to see how zombie bites relate to Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results.

Bookmark It

ReputationDefender Blog ran across an interesting story from MSNBC today. According to a study conducted by CareerBuilder.com, the number of Hiring Managers who use social media to screen job applicants has doubled in the past two years. Currently, one out of every five bosses utilize sites like Facebook and Myspace for hiring best practices. Additionally, one third of professionals disqualify job applicants based on what they find online, usually drunken photos or drug abuse. Quoting from the page:

The survey found that 34 percent of the managers who do screen candidates on the Internet found content that made them drop the candidate from any short list.

The top area for concern among the hiring managers with 41 percent citing this as a downfall were candidates posting information about drinking or using drugs.

The second area with 40 percent of concern were candidates posting provocative or inappropriate photographs or information.

Other areas of concern to arise from social network sites were poor communication skills, lying about qualifications, candidates using discriminatory remarks related to race, gender or religion, and an unprofessional screen name.

But the survey found hiring managers scouring social network pages was not all bad with 24 percent of these managers saying they found content to help them solidify their decision to hire that candidate.

Top factors that influenced their hiring decision included candidate’s backgrounds supporting their qualifications for the job, proving they had good communications skills, and having a site that conveyed a professional image with a wide range of interests.

ReputationDefender Blog has covered these types of stories before (see here, here and here) but this story is newsworthy because it shows that the number of HR people facile with web 2.0 is on the rise. It also points out that your online reputation can also help you land a job, not just be disqualified for one.

“Hiring managers are using the Internet to get a more well-rounded view of job candidates in terms of their skills, accomplishments and overall fit within the company,” said CareerBuilder.com spokeswoman Rosemary Haefner in a statement.

“As a result, more job seekers are taking action to make their social networking profiles employer-friendly. Sixteen percent of workers who have social networking pages said they modified the content on their profile to convey a more professional image to potential employers.”

ReputationDefender can help anyone, including students and job seekers, refine their online reputation and present a professional, employable image online. Check out the newly minted ReputationDefender Testimonials Page, to see what others are saying about defending their online reputation.

Bookmark It

It’s not some industry secret that Google is the search engine to beat a formidable search engine. What began as a backrub has now morphed into a full-fledged powerhouse of search. But Silicon Valley can be somewhat of an insular place. Every day rumors fly about this start up, or that maverick VC or some crazy idea that is gonna change the whole game. But in the case of Google and market dominance, how much of it is just talk, and how much of it is real?

Turns out, it’s real.

The above image comes to us from the analysts over at Web-traffic research firm Hitwise. According to their numbers (and spiffy chart) Google claims 70.8 percent of all U.S. searches as of July. This is an up tick from the 60 percent share they held in July 2006.

Beyond the big data for the almighty G, things get a little depressing when we look at also-rans MSN Search and Live.com. In spite of the fact that their product has undergone continuous reworking over the past three years, Microsoft has steadily lost share as Google has grown voraciously. Think Bill Gates is trying to get the anti-trust guys that investigated him to turn their eyes on Mountain View?

Bookmark It

ReputationDefender Blog recently posted about the cyber attacks that are taking place against websites associated with the former Russian republic of Georgia.

Something curious has happened to Google Maps recently: Georgia got scrubbed.

The interiors of the countries of Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan have all been made curiously empty on the “map” function, erasing the whereabouts of towns, roads, cities, etc. This was not the case last week, and one can only assume that this move was done in response to the recent escalating conflicts in the region.

Bookmark It

It’s Over. Finished. Kaput.

The search war has officially ended and Google is the undisputed champion of the internet, if these new statistics are to be believed. Both the efrontier blog and Digital Daily article at All Things Digital are reporting that Google is earning $1.10 for every search marketing dollar spent in America.

How is this possible?

It seems advertisers are pulling money out of Yahoo and MSN to give to the Mountain View search giant.

Today our US Search Engine Performance Report: Q2 2008 was released. Analysis of data from our client index showed that Google took more than its fair share of the overall increase in search spending: for every new dollar spent on search in Q2 2008 versus Q2 2007, $1.10 went to Google. Yahoo lost $0.09, and Microsoft lost $0.01. In other words, advertisers are putting all of their new search dollars into Google, and pulling money out of Yahoo Search and Microsoft Live Search.

There you have it. American search marketers are literally giving Google 110%. Yahoo and Microsoft should go home and think long and hard about how they are going to get back in the search, and online spend, game.

Bookmark It

One of Google’s mantras since Day 1 has been “Don’t be evil.” People have generally applauded this unique (albeit vague) corporate philosophy, as  a refreshing new way of approaching business. It goes a long way into showing the rest of the world what the mindset is within the Googleplex.

But, ah yes, when you bring up “evil” you inevitably invite a philosophical discussion. Starting broadly, what is “evil”? For that matter, what is “good” (for if there is an evil, there must be an opposite, right?)? We’ll spare you the pondering and just point out why we’re posting today:

Google has murdered the AdSense account run by one of the web’s most influential anti-Scientology sites.

Yesterday, the search giant cut off all ads served to Enturbulation, a fledgling site dedicated to promoting activism against the Church of Scientology and all its related organizations.

The above quote is a grab from an article that is appearing in The Register, out of the United Kingdom.

Enturbulation is considered to be something of a “home” for the now infamous Anonymous movement, which attacks Scientology. While it would be fun to play tin-foil hat and start coming up with some sinister plot involving L. Ron Hubbard controlling Google, a more sensible explanation can be found in Google’s new AdSense policies which state that partner sites may not include “advocacy against any individual, group, or organization.”

It’s an interesting move by Google, and one that is similar to actions by YouTube (which Google also owns) last month. In that instance, YouTube (easily the most popular video site on the Internet) deleted an account run by Mark Bunker, a well-known TV journalist and anti-Scientology activist. YouTube’s official line is that it destroyed Bunker’s video channel because he had a previous account suspended for violations of site policy.

So, is Google run by Scientology? Definitely not. But the search giant is taking a stand against online defamation and internet harassment.

Bookmark It

This excellent article comes from the Times Online and discusses how online social networking can damage employment prospects in the UK. While we’ve touched upon this topic before - particularly how it pertains to job applicants in the US - the stats and information provided in this piece are noteworthy for job applicants in the UK. According to the article’s sources:

Checking social networking sites was routine for recruiters

Almost two thirds (62 per cent) of British executives were signed up to Facebook, MySpace or another social networking site

One in five employers admitted that they used the sites to search for information on candidates and looked at how they projected themselves.

Almost two thirds said the information they found there influenced a recruitment decision, while a quarter said that they had changed their mind and decided not to hire someone because of what was online.

Bookmark It

Young people have embraced social media sites as part of their IRL lives and many are actively creating and sharing content online. 93% of teenagers are online, according to the Pew Research Project “Teens and Social Media,” released at the close of 2007, and nearly two thirds of online teens are creative content producers. Whether this content takes the form of blogs, photo journals, or personal sites, young people are actively creating content online, and as Generation Y grows up this trend seems likely to continue.

Bookmark It

How reliable is the Internet? Perhaps more importantly, how reliable does the average American assume the Internet to be? A new report from the Pew Research Project (released December 30, 2007) entitled “Information Searches that Solve Problems,” reveals a new trend in the way Americans solve their biggest problems. According to the report, when faced with a serious concern (be that concern financially based, a health concern, a government policy question, or any of 10 possible problems presented by the Pew Research Project) 58% of respondents replied that they had turned to the Internet as a trusted source of information. That’s compared to 53% (the second greatest percentage) of respondents who replied that, when faced with a pertinent question, they turned to professionals, such as doctors and lawyers, for answers.

As the Pew Research Project report shows, people with questions are turning to the Internet more than to alternative sources, including professional experts, family members, published articles, and government agencies. As Internet use grows, a trust in its relevance and reliability also increases in the psyche of the American public. With more and more people turning to the internet as a trusted source of information, it is important to make sure that one’s personal information accurate and relevant online.

Bookmark It