The correct answer is B. As recounted in Angelica Malin’s new book, in which a study of the largest 250 companies on the London Stock Exchange found that companies with more than one third of women in their executive committees enjoyed a profit margin greater than ten times higher. Most times, money talks – or to quote Bob Dylan: “Money doesn’t talk, it swears.” So . . . why in the world haven’t more companies pursued a policy of adding more female executives? Is it possible that (white) male leaders are choosing their own comfort level over what would aid the company? Is it possible they are simply unwilling to share the “reins of power” out of fears of being replaced? One’s head spins given all the interpretative possibilities of such a stark, startling statistic. Malin’s book is nothing if not a call for more female entrepreneurship, more empowerment, more determination than ever to break through. No wonder the book is dedicated in part to Taylor Swift.
Angelica Malin is the Editor-in-Chief of About Time Magazine and she’s the UK’s rising voice for championing women founders and entrepreneurs. She’s appeared on BBC News and LBC Business Hour and has been featured in The Telegraph, Forbes, and Real Business.
The correct answer to this week’s quiz is option A), Facebook. Per post, the recent compensation rate on Facebook was $250. By comparison, on average influencers get paid by sponsors $100 per post on Instagram and merely $20 per post on Twitter. The second-best monetary gain for influencers is in fact on YouTube, where a post typically earns them $200. In other words, trust has become a commodity, too. In Gordon Glenister’s new book, he aptly points out that companies have turned to influencers who possess more “street cred” and offer sponsors access to passionate niche audiences that make influences an appealing alternative to high-priced celebrities appearing in TV spots. Another way to think of the influencer phenomenon, however, is that in parallel to how companies now offer workers gigs rather than careers, here again the compensation levels are collapsing as companies try to earn (lost) trust on the cheap by associating themselves with up-and-coming social media stars.
Released today: episode #63 of my podcast series “Dan Hill’s EQ Spotlight,” featuring Gordon Glenister discussing Influencer Marketing Strategy: How to Create Successful Influencer Marketing. Click here to get to the new episode.
Gordon Glenister is the Global Head of Influencer Marketing for the Branded Content Marketing Association. Host of the Influence podcast, Glenister was previously the Director General of the British Promotional Merchandise Association for over a decade.
The correct answer is C because for the Model 3, for instance, Tesla has spent about $6 on advertising for every model it’s sold. How is that possible? The answer is that Tesla leads the way in changing the business model from build / market / sell to market / sell / build and market some more. Tesla does so by having a values-based purpose out ahead of the traditional value proposition, i.e., Tesla aims to rid the world of fossil fuels. That positioning earns Tesla free media and buyer loyalty. And Tesla goes further by inviting consumers to provide input on where its showrooms are located, how they want to configure their own cars based on guidance from an owner advisor, and a referral program with a $1,000 cash incentive to both the owner and the friend who purchases based on a referral. The result is that Tesla has 22% of the electric car market, Mercedes-Benz 5%.
Mathew Sweezey is the Director of Market Strategy for Salesforce. Mathew is the host of the award-winning podcast The Electronic Propaganda Society and an accomplished author, having written for The Economist, Forbes, the Harvard Business Review, and AdAge.
If you’re old enough, you may remember “To Tell the Truth” – a TV game show in which three contestants all supposedly had the same identity so celebrity panelists had to ask questions to figure out who was THE person with that name and unusual occupation or experience. Well, I guess you could say that my parents didn’t brand me clearly! And that’s a problem whenever you’re engaged in a new enterprise like the podcast series I’m launching today. These guys are all Dan Hill. The first is easily the most famous: a Canadian singer-songwriter whose biggest hit “Sometimes When We Touch” peaked at #3 on the US Billboard Hot 100 charts and #1 in Canada in 1977. The middle Dan Hill depicted here is a British digital designer and urbanist, and the third Dan Hill is a women’s head soccer coach in Oklahoma.
Check out my new podcast!
My new podcast series, Dan Hill’s EQ Spotlight appears on the New Books Network, which gets nearly one million downloads monthly. I am honored to be a part of this high-quality group. Below is the link to find all four podcasts.
She almost died a quiet death, and certainly the Minnesota-based farmer cooperative known as Land O’Lakes would have preferred it that way. But when the Minnesota Reformer ran a story about the Land O’Lakes company retiring the Indian maiden who has appeared on its packaging for nearly a century, the story blew up on social media and elsewhere. Soon the retirement reached The New York Times and Fox News, leading U.S. congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) to denounce politically correct “millennials” supposedly taking over the co-op.
Now on the surface, the maiden mascot re-designed in the 1950’s by an Ojibwe Indian artist, Patrick DesJariat, may not seem anything other than benign. What’s objectionable about a young Native American woman kneeling by the side of a blue lake, holding a 4-stick box of butter? Her smile is pleasant enough – but that’s where the problem starts. That’s because the image of a happy Indian maiden evokes tales of U.S. cavalry troops stationed at reservation forts engaging in what they euphemistically called “squaw-chasing” and what we should acknowledge was coerced “seduction” or worse. Being portrayed as sexually available and subject to conquering isn’t desirable. Now, the smile alone might not get us to such a sinister reading of the Land O’Lakes logo. But add in the maiden’s kneeling, compliant posture, and the fact that for years people on social media have practiced the “boob trick” of revising the logo’s image so that the maiden’s knees are chest-high instead, and you can begin to see why the co-op finally, wisely, decently enough decided that the time had come to stop trafficking in Indian stereotypes.
The truth is that lots of logos exist that should be retired. Perhaps the worst prominent use of Native American imagery is in baseball: the Cleveland Indians’ Chief Wahoo. His eyebrows are raised and his eyes are wide open, fully alert. His smile is intense, too, and fierce. Taken together, the Chief’s beady eyes and all those teeth showing suggest how, when the mouth pulls wide and taut, the emotion being revealed is vivid anger, like a dog growling because its bone has been taken away.
Some offensive imagery has been retired; until 1991 a Mexican armed robber, the Frito Bandito, was used to sell that snack. Other vile brand logos remain. There’s a long history of African-Americans being made into caricatures, resembling the grateful, obsequious house servants in Gone with the Wind. I’m thinking of Quaker Oats’ Aunt Jemima and Mars’ chef, Uncle Ben, for instance. The recent modified versions of those logos are certainly more upscale, sleek and less servile-looking, but frankly my dear I don’t give a damn: get rid of them.