Economy

U.S. Workforce Trends: Revenge of the Gray-Hairs

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A new study by the Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends unit reveals that when it comes to working, U.S. senior citizens aren’t ready to leave the stage. Instead, they’re staying on for encore after encore.

Incredibly, the Pew study forecasts that nearly 95% of the growth of the American labor force over the next eight years will be among workers age 55+.

What’s behind this interesting demographic development – one that has actually been taking shape for some time now? I think it’s three things:

Americans are living longer and staying healthier longer
Most seniors wish to stay active and productive as long as possible
The economic climate

This last factor has been particularly acute with the current recession that has caused the loss of retirement investment balances and real estate values. This is underscored in the Pew survey, where nearly two thirds of workers in their 50s reported that they might need to push back their expected retirement date because of the current economic conditions.

But the Pew study also makes clear that once the recession lifts, it’s highly unlikely that the aging of the workforce will reverse. That’s because many seniors find that working satisfies fundamental social needs like “being with other people” (56%), “feeling useful” (68%), and “giving me something to do” (57%).

By contrast, the other workers surveyed by Pew (ages 16 to 64) see themselves working “to support myself and my family” (88%), “live independently” (78%), and “to qualify for a pension or Social Security” (65%).

All of which proves that as people mature and move through the cycle of life, many of them make a shift in their perspective: “Work to Live” becomes “Live to Work.” For someone just entering the workforce, that might be laughably hard to believe … but the Pew survey results bear it out.

And another takeaway message to younger workers: Don’t expect your older colleagues to exit the scene anytime soon … the competition’s still hot ‘n heavy.

Rupert Murdoch’s “Paid Content” Gamble

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rupert MurdochMedia mogul Rupert Murdoch’s pronouncement last week that beginning in July 2010, online content for all of his news media properties will be available for a fee – not for free – has surprised many in the industry.

“Quality journalism is not cheap,” Murdoch declared. His announcement comes hard on the heels of his massive media conglomerate News Corporation reporting a ~$3.4 billion loss for the last fiscal year.

While admiring Mr. Murdoch’s brave stance and willingness to get out in front of an issue that has bedeviled the newspaper industry for the past four or five years, one is left wondering if he’s playing the role of Don Quixote rather than Richard the Lionheart in this drama.

For sure, the pay-per-view business model looks great to any publishing company that has seen the advertising-driven business model come under so much stress and strain in recent years. And The Wall Street Journal, one of Murdoch’s properties, has been able to charge a fee for online access in a practice that dates back prior to that publication’s acquisition by News Corporation.

So what will happen in this glorious experiment? Will legions of newshounds flock to the various Murdoch sites – The Wall Street Journal, Times of London, Australian, New York Post – and plunk down pay-per-view dollars or a monthly access fee for the privilege of reading the latest news bits?

Or will people rely on the many other (free) outlets for news, while also receiving and passing along “copy-and-paste” materials over the web — an effortless task that can be completed in mere seconds?

[And good luck trying to use legal means to prevent the dissemination of copyrighted material; the litigation costs could well outstrip any compensation dollars awarded, while being a major distraction inside the company and causing a PR kerfuffle outside.]

That giant sucking sound you hear could be the hordes of cyber-visitors heading on over to CNN, USA Today and other free news sites, whose traffic volume will spike and perhaps even bring in additional advertising revenues off the extra hits. Would these and other free, advertising-driven media properties like to find ways to increase revenues? Sure. But most of them would prefer to be #3 or #4 to take the leap on paid content – not a high-risk first or second.

There will always be some people willing to pay for premium content. But let’s face it; most news isn’t “premium.” It’s a commodity – and its dissemination is helped along by hundreds or thousands of people copying and forwarding articles and and/or links via e-mail, Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook … you name it.

Rupert Murdoch has a history of being pretty savvy when it comes to the news business. And certainly he has the power and the resources to undertake this new effort.

But his naiveté may be showing on this one. He is, after all, nearly 80 years old and notoriously online-illiterate himself. And while the saying goes that “knowledge is power” … “power without knowledge” isn’t usually a good recipe for success.

USPS: Why don’t we just throw another couple billion around?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Last week, the United States Postal Service reported its latest quarterly financials — a $2.4 billion loss. Compare that result against the same quarter last year (pre-stock market dive), when the USPS lost only a mere $1.1 billion …

But what the heck? Why doesn’t the government throw a few more billions of dollars around? That’s probably in the cards, because Postmaster General Jack Potter has let it be known that the USPS may be on track for losing as much as $7 billion for the year … and that’s even if the USPS follows through on its plans to shutter ~3,200 post office locations (nearly 10% of the total).

Of course, one of the reasons for the sorry financials is a decline of USPS operating revenue on the order of around 9%. The most recent postal rate hike couldn’t make up for the ~14% decrease in mail volume, which dipped not just because of the recession but also because of changing communications practices, online bill-paying and the never-ending growth of e-mail.

Still, those volume declines are not as steep or as challenging as many private-industry companies have faced in their industries. Could it be that the USPS, as a government entity with all of the bureaucracy and HR/personnel strictures that entails, simply cannot be as nimble and flexible as firms in private industry? And what does this portend for us in the realm of government-managed healthcare?

Maybe the words of singer-songwriter Bobby McFerrin are applicable here: “Don’t worry. Be happy.”

Besides, what’s the alternative — clinical depression?

How “social” should your office environment be?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the early years of the Internet, companies worried about the loss of productivity if employees were tempted to surf online in amongst their work duties. There was also the issue of the “appropriateness” of the web content being viewed. In response, various web tracking capabilities were introduced that enable companies to monitor online activities on networked computers.

On the other hand, as the Internet became all-pervasive in daily life, many companies also adopted a policy of allowing a modest amount of web surfing during work breaks to allow employees to conduct personal business such as shopping and bill-paying.

Now, with the rise of social media, the whole issue has been brought to the fore once again. The proliferation of Facebook accounts in particular has resulted in a new spike of personal online activities at work. A recent study by Nucleus Research bears it out. Based on study findings, Nucleus deduces that companies allowing employee access to Facebook lose an average of 1.5% in total employee productivity. And in an era of cutthroat competition globally, 1.5% of productivity is no slouch amount.

To reach this conclusion, Nucleus Research found that slightly more than three-fourths of the employees surveyed have a Facebook account. Of those who do, nearly two-thirds admitted to accessing their account during working hours.

The average amount of time spent per day on Facebook on office time is about 15 minutes – although the study uncovered a few employees who spent upwards of two hours daily during work hours. (Shame on those employees … but shame on their employers, too, for being so utterly clueless about those employees’ behavior!)

Of course, some people’s activities on Facebook have a business purpose, don’t they? Well … it is true that some employees manage “fan” pages for their company as an adjunct of their personal Facebook account. But that shouldn’t represent more than a small portion of any firm’s workers – perhaps those in the marketing, sales, HR or shareholder relations departments.

And the Nucleus Research study findings reflect this as well, because nearly 90% of the respondents who access Facebook at work could not articulate a business justification for doing so.

Perhaps the study’s most surprising finding was the ~5% of respondents who never access Facebook anywhere but at work. What this may mean is that they built their entire Facebook profile on work-time as well. Chalk up some more wasted hours!

The Nucleus Research findings demonstrate that as time progresses and various social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter become even more pervasive communications tools for people at all levels in the organization, the old guidelines for balancing work and personal life must continue to evolve.

The kneejerk reaction is to simply block access to Facebook on all office computers. But there will always be some employees who have a legitimate business reason to be on Facebook. And then there are the the ever-growing ranks of telecommuters working offsite, who surely have access to alternate laptops or PDAs even if their company-issued equipment blocks access.

As is usually the case with situations like this, the easiest fix is sometimes not the best one. And at the end of the day, “big brotherism” could reduce employee morale even further — hardly the result one would hope for in the current difficult business climate where “improving company morale” is far more just an abstract concept in an HR textbook.

A word of advice to customer call centers: Location matters.

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the drive to become low-cost producers in their industry categories and to be price-competitive in a down economy, many companies are looking into every corner of their business to wring out excess costs wherever they can.

And with business as soft as it is right now, one would think that telephone customer contact centers are a prime target for outsourcing and offshoring. After all, it’s one of the more labor-intensive operations. And relying on resources in English-speaking Second and Third World countries is far cheaper than employing American workers — 50% to 75% less costly by some estimates.

But instead of migrating offshore, evidence is mounting that some companies are beginning to bring their call center operations back into the United States instead.

Why is this happening? Well, when one considers that the purpose of a call center is to promote customer satisfaction, placing these functions offshore hasn’t exactly accomplished that. It’s a topic I’ve addressed before in this blog.

And now, we have new survey data that prove it. A recently-published survey conducted by CFI Group (Claes Fornell International) covers 2,200 respondents who rated telephone customer contact centers run for retailing firms, cable/satellite TV providers, cellular phone service providers, financial service firms, computer equipment manufacturers and government agencies.

The annual survey uses the University of Michigan’s American Customer Satisfaction Index to rate overall satisfaction. In this year’s study, that satisfaction index stands at 74 on a 100-point scale. Not a great score by any stretch; in fact, most companies would surely want to score better.

But when comparing the ratings for domestic call centers versus offshore ones, the differences are stark. The domestic satisfaction index was 84, while the offshore index was only 62.

Moreover, the survey respondents were nearly twice as likely to recommend a company or product to others if they thought the customer contact center reps are in the United States … and three times more likely to abandon the brand if the call center is located offshore.

Is this disparity in results simply the result of American nativism or chauvinism? Perhaps. But it becomes a lot harder to discount the differences when we see that respondents reported that U.S. call center reps resolved their problems 68% of the time during the first contact — “first-call resolution” in industry jargon — as compared to only 42% of the time for contact centers located offshore. That’s a difference that can’t be ignored.

Looking into every corner of a business to find ways to drive down costs certainly makes sense. But in the case of customer call centers, there’s clearly a danger of being “penny-wise, pound-foolish” … and risking a customer backlash that ends up negating any cost savings you might have realized – or worse.

Mag Drag: The midyear report on magazine closings says it all.

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The “gone for good” list has been compiled for the first half of 2009 … and it looks pretty grim for the magazine industry. In fact, Oxbridge Communications’ Media Finder, a database that tracks U.S. and Canadian periodicals, reports that a record 279 magazine titles ceased publication during the first half of the year.

The news that 187 new magazines were actually launched over the same period is little consolation. The net loss of 92 magazines is more than ever, and demonstrates all too clearly how the recession has hit key market sectors particularly hard – finance, automotive, fashion and several others that have traditionally been major contributors of advertising revenue to print publications.

Which categories of magazines fared worst over the past six months? Media Finder’s data show that “regional interest” publications suffered the most casualties, with 27 magazines in that category folding. “Lifestyle” publications were also hurt, with 14 titles biting the dust. And magazines catering to the construction business and related segments were also hit hard, no doubt reflecting the depressed real estate and housing market.

What’s particularly interesting about the YTD 2009 list of shuttered magazines is that many of them were well known in their category and boasted significant circulation. Certainly, periodicals like Country Home, PR Week, Portfolio, Nickelodeon, Hallmark Magazine and Teen weren’t slouch publications by any means.

What can we expect for the rest of 2009? Is the worst over? Seeing as how the economic recovery is (optimistically) still months away, you’d have to bet on additional magazine titles folding during the second half of the year – including a few more of the big ones.

And we’re certain to see editorial format and other changes being made to some of the more famous publications (such as Newsweek’s recent makeover) in a bid to reestablish their relevance and maintain their financial viability.

Twitter’s Law of Unintended Consequences

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As I’ve outlined in a recent blog post, where Twitter has shown it has “legs” isn’t in the area most hyped by its founders.

As it turns out, “What are you doing?” hasn’t been much of a foundation for building a money-making social media platform. And in fact, the inevitable media backlash has now set in — even as the number of new Twitter users have begun to plateau and the majority of current members use the service hardly at all.

But hard on the heels of the Iranian and Moldovan unrest, in which Twitter played an important role facilitating the organizing of anti-government public demonstrations, comes another use of Twitter that few could have foreseen.

A recent article by Steven Sears in Barron’s Magazine outlines how Twitter is being used to affect the share price of stocks. According to Sears, “Before the market opens and throughout the trading day, Twitter lets you tap into market-moving news .. and link through attached URLs to more detailed analysis … You can control your information streams by deciding who to follow, and who can follow you.”

That’s hardly revolutionary behavior. But here’s the interesting part: By law, brokers must save instant messages and e-mail correspondence, but no such mandate exists for tweets on Twitter.

What this means is that some of the more sensitive information or speculation about a company makes it onto Twitter long before it’s broached elsewhere.

One example noted in the Sears article was Matrixx Initiatives, the manufacturer of Zicam nasel spray. Speculation that using Zicam might damage people’s sense of smell started to circulate on Twitter. The result? The stock price fell dramatically from $19 to $13 … and those following the news about Matrixx on Twitter were “in the know” a lot sooner than others.

So here we have yet another example of the unintended consequences of adopting new communications techniques. Twitter is effectively replacing instant messaging capabiliites — without the attendent legal paper-trail requirements.

I wonder what’s next?

Bing Search: Pike’s Peak … or Halley’s Comet?

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Well, it didn’t take long for the marketplace to render its verdict on the Bing search engine phenomenon. Fueled by a multi-million dollar advertising rollout plus an aggressive PR push, web tracking service StatCounter has reported that Bing actually vaulted past Yahoo to become the #2 search engine … for one day.

That’s right. According to StatCounter’s data, on June 4th, Bing captured over 15% of the U.S. search share market, while Yahoo had only around 10%. By the next day, Bing’s share had dropped below 10% while Yanoo notched up a point to 11%. And by Day 3, Bing’s share had fallen still further to just under 7%.

Think it couldn’t get worse? The day after that, Bing was mired below 6% share.

Similar results were recorded worldwide.

What’s behind the primal shrug that Bing seems to have met in the marketplace? Certainly, all the PR hype was successful in getting people curious enough to click through and do a bit of tire-kicking. But it’s obvious that most weren’t particularly impressed by what they experienced, despite the fact that Bing does provide some user-friendly features not available over at Google.

But that’s not nearly enough for success. Google’s users are, by and large, quite satisfied with the search experience. It’s what they know. It’s comfortable. And unless there’s a compelling reason to switch — to change deep-seated habits — most people simply aren’t going to play ball … whether you put millions of dollars in advertising behind your pitch or not.

The folks at Google might have been shaken a least a bit on June 4th when their market share of search dropped to 72%. But they needn’t have worried. Four days later, Google’s share was back up to 80% — where it had been to begin with.

Next case, please?

Even John Q. Public doesn’t believe newspapers are going to survive …

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s not just inside observers who are predicting the demise of the printed newspaper. The “Great American Public” seems to be well clued in to the problems of newspapers also. In fact, a poll released by Rasmussen Reports on May 12, 2009 reports that fully two thirds of adult Americans believe daily papers will disappear within the next ten years.

Even more dramatic, nearly one in five respondents think that it will happen within three years.

When two thirds of all adult Americans predict daily papers will go the way of the dinosaur within the coming decade, that’s big news. No longer is this just a discussion among industry insiders … it’s crept into the popular culture. That’s yet another big danger signal for the papers.

All of this is underscored by Rasmussen’s findings that a majority of Americans (56%) purchase a paper once per week or less — and 37% rarely or never buy a print version of their local paper.

In a possibly related development, Rasmussen’s surveys report that the credibility of newspapers and other media has declined in the public’s eyes. For example, only about one in four respondents has a favorable opinion of the New York Times. That may be a new low for a paper that likes to think of itself as America’s #1 print news source.

The most recent Newspaper Association of America’s financial figures are showing that newspapers have lost a whopping $18 billion over the past three years in their print operations. And while many papers have been counting on their online operations to counterbalance all of this red ink, total Internet revenues over the same period amounted to ~$9 billion — not nearly enough to erase the losses on the print side.

Of course, as this is 2009, the story would not be complete without government officials coming to the rescue, offering their share of interesting proposals. But how does the public feel about these efforts by politicians to save the newspapers? Nearly 40% favor federal government subsidies to keep newspapers in business … but slightly more than half feel it’s better simply to let them go out of business.

It will be interesting to see what the federal and state legislatures actually end up doing — whether it be turning newspaper companies into not-for-profit entities as Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland has suggested … or providing special business tax breaks for the industry as has been proposed by Washington’s governor Christine Gregoire.

Whatever is attempted, my prediction is that it won’t have nearly the positive effect its proponents hope for. The sweep of change in the communications arena is simply too broad and deep for that.

Marabel Chanin: A Symbol of a City

Phillip Nones Uncategorized , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Marabel Chanin, speaking to reporters outside her home in Detroit's North End in summer 2008.
Marabel Chanin, speaking to reporters outside her home in Detroit's North End in summer 2008.
One of the sadder stories to hit the television airwaves in recent days concerns Marabel Chanin, an elderly woman living alone in an urban “ghost” neighborhood. When Marabel, a single woman, moved to Detroit’s North End back in 1964, the area, adjacent the Palmer Park Golf Course, was a beautiful, established Detroit neighborhood graced by roomy, circa 1920s single-family homes and lush landscaping.

Moving forward some 45 years later, Marabel was the last person on her block of Robinwood Avenue, living in daily (and nightly) fear of break-ins, gunfire, or worse. Complaints to police went nowhere, so her phone call to the local Detroit Fox News affiliate TV station (WJBK’s Problem Solvers) was a last-ditch attempt to find a solution to her dilemma.

Marabel’s story, profiled by the station last summer, brought the issues of crime & grime, urban decay and danger down to the most personal level and struck a nerve with viewers across the Detroit viewing area. The story ended up on the Internet, where I viewed the news clip on YouTube while researching my blog entry on the city of Detroit’s decline. It was so moving, I felt compelled to contact WJBK-TV, hoping to hear a good end to the story.

Unfortunately, as was chronicled in a follow-up report by the station broadcast last week, there was no good end. In fact, Marabel passed away in her home right around Christmas and was discovered days later. And now, five months on, her body remains at the county morgue, claimed by no one. Because of severe budget shortfalls, there are no funds to bury her or the nearly 100 other unclaimed bodies that are being kept there.

A story like this is gripping enough on a purely personal level … but it is also powerful in a larger context. To what degree does someone like Ms. Chanin — a single person of middle-class means but without close relatives — bear the blame for allowing herself to become the last person living on her city block in a trashed neighborhood? Or are there also larger forces at work that overwhelm the ability of someone of modest means (and elderly as well) to figure out a solution and act on it?

It was the southern agrarian writer Andrew Lytle who wrote in an essay years ago about the potentially dehumanizing effects of urban living. Lytle believed people were meant to live in smaller communities, where folks know each other and look out for neighbors in need. He also warned against large-scale industrialization, arguing that economic downturns lead to massive unemployment and thus dislocation of workers, whereas people who work the land usually can get by in a bad economy.

Of course, Lytle did not anticipate the advent of “industrialized agriculture” and the effect that would have on small farmers. But when you consider the economic landscape in 2009 and its effects not only on Detroit but also communities like Elkhart, IN, Lytle’s essay suddently takes on a very contemporary significance.

And what of Marabel Chanin? WJBK-TV has established a fund to provide a burial ceremony for her — and to do the same with some of the others unclaimed at the morgue. Tax-deductible donations to the “Marabel Chanin & Friends” fund are being accepted c/o National City Bank/PNC (First National Bank Building, 660 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226). Reportedly, community response has been strong.