We at Beekeeper Group are fans of data visualization AND geo-location.  So how could I resist sharing this incredible infographic comparing the different tools? Created by Mark Fidelman.

I read an article last weekend that I just can't get out of my head.  Washington Post had a feature about the next generation entering the federal workforce.  Here some of the statistics from the piece that you should know:

•    The Obama administration hopes to fill 50,000 to 60,000 entry-level jobs in the next year, the largest burst since the Kennedy era.
•    Almost one in three of the 142,690 federal workers hired last year was 29 or younger, while more than one in four were between 30 and 39
•    In 10 years, about 400,000 of the 2 million federal workers will be younger than 35.

What does this mean for advocacy?  Opportunity.
“Young workers are restless for risk. They don't want to be GS-9s forever. They expect to be consulted and engaged -- no head-down, it-has-always-worked-this-way chain of command here. They're digital natives, too, who want to manage acquisition contracts on Twitter and who think crowd sourcing and cloud computing are the future of customer service.”

I implore you to rethink your communications strategy in light of this imminent workforce.  Some items to consider:
•    New methods of communication
•    Outside of the box ideas
•    Strategy for working through administrative hurdles
•    Increased collaboration
•    Embracing social media tools

So, how will you use this information?

Who knew the New Zealand Executive wing of its parlimentary complex was called The Beehive? Not I.

Just like your average beehive, New Zealand's one has a queen- Elizabeth II, Queen of the Commonwealth realms. Unlike most beehives, this one boasts marble, stainless steel, glass, and copper. Although I'd hate to taste that honey.

"The Cat's Out of the Bag" - this was a recent email subject line sent from 'Share Our Strength' following an accidental distribution of one of their test emails to their entire database list. We point out this error not to pile on to the poor staffer who pressed 'Send' when they should have pressed 'Test', but to praise 'Share our Strength' for owning-up to their error, writing quickly to their email recipients, and potentially turning an awkward situation into a positive PR moment. Please see the email below:

Subject: The Cat's Out of the Bag

Sender: No Kid Hungry - Clay Dunn <info@strength.org>

This kind of thing could happen to anyone (which is why it is imperative you test your emails, and confirm the distribution list before you hit send). But if it does happen to you, remember this example as an excellent way to deal with it. On a side note, I think the 'correction' email subject line was much more catchy than the original "Melissa, we'd like to hear from you" (which honestly sounds a little spammy). I am betting the 'correction' email got a lot more opens than the original misfire even before the recipients knew what it was about. Just something to think about when you write your next subject line.

Oh, and remember, always test the email before you send it. Here is a handy quick check list:

- Have someone else review the language and test that the links are working.

- Check the distribution list, and confirm it matches the size and type you were expecting.

- Send test emails to Outlook, Gmail, Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail as different emails will appear differently on each platform.

- Check that all images are correctly linked and that they appear when delivered.

- Avoid using too many images/graphics as many people have default settings that remove images.

- Avoid using special characters or fonts as they can appear strangely for some users

- Make sure your subject line is less than 50 characters (it helps people read the entire subject line in their preview pane)

Good luck and happy emailing!

I admit it.  I’m overwhelmed by apps.  I don’t even have the app leading IPhone, but I feel like I’m swimming in an endless pool of apps on my Android phone.  I can’t even imagine what the poor IPhone users feel.  I rely on a few trusted tech blogs and word-of-mouth to find useful apps these days.  Searching through the store of available apps on my phone is a fruitless activity, with too many apps that claim to do the same thing causing more confusion than clarity.

Is this really the future of mobile and the mobile web?  In our non-mobile computing, we’ve been moving away from installed applications to browser based tools for almost a decade.  From IM clients to social media updating tools, as soon as someone makes it just as good (or better) with a fully web-based program, everyone rushes to adopt the browser-based tool.

For applications that require more than an internet connection to be useful (video editing tools, graphics applications, computer gaming) they retain a niche audience that uses said application, or they get adopted into the next version of operating systems by Microsoft or Apple.

I’m not naive enough to think that apps are going away.  There will always be a market for specialized apps that solve a problem for a specific niche audience.  But I do think that apps are a result of deficiencies in today’s mobile phone operating systems and web browsers. 

I suspect in the years to come, we will see trends similar to what happened with personal computers over the past decade.  Smartphone processing speeds and operating systems will get better and incorporate many of the features that are found in the most downloaded apps (Facebook, Twitter, IM, etc.).   Mobile web speeds will continue to improve and browsers will evolve to allow developers to build the same thin-client, browser based tools that we get on our computers (online banking, content/blog management tools, HootSuite, Meebo).   Many of these developers will be making the leap from a very successful app to a browser-based service when the technology is right.

Both of these trends will eliminate the need for many of the most downloaded apps, and I say good riddance.  I’d much rather visit a series of bookmarked web addresses on my (much improved) mobile browser than juggle the need to find, download, update, and use hundreds of individual applications.

You just completed a successful fly-in. Your top industry advocates flew into DC from around the country, met with their Congressman and Senators, and are feeling excited by their interactions with the law making process. You're on top of the world and ready for a much needed vacation. But what if we told you that your advocates have only made it to the first date?

Anne Darconte (Director of Outreach for the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association), a grassroots practitioner with extensive industry experience, likes to tell a story (that happened while she was working for a former employer) where she attended a regional meeting of industry advocates who had been to a DC fly-in some months before. Despite the fly-in being widely regarded as a huge success, none of the participants had since arranged a site visit for their legislators, sought a follow-up meeting, nor even sent an email to their Legislator's staff. The contact began and ended at the DC fly-in.

Anne asked the meeting attendees to raise their hands if they were married. Most did. She then asked, now raise your hand if you proposed to your spouse on the first date. There were nervous chuckles, and of course no-one raised their hand. She said, of course you didn't. You wooed your spouse over many dates, you introduced them to your parents and met their parents, you showed them how important they were to you and established the foundation for a long term relationship.

The analogy may sound a little cute, but Anne is 100% right about the importance of building that ongoing relationship with elected representatives. Sometimes a Congressman may be familiar with a fly-in participant, but more often than not, they are meeting their constituent for the first time. This is therefore the first step in building a relationship. Advocates must be educated and assisted to maintain that contact, to find reasons to engage their legislators and to report back their progress. The fly-in can't truly be considered a success until you know if that relationship is starting to blossom. After all, how many of us really remember all of our first dates that never made it to a second night out?

Australia is in the midst of another federal election. Announced last Saturday, the parties have 5 weeks to campaign before the population goes to the polls. Aside from a compulsory voting system, multiple polling stations (you don't have to vote in your precinct), universal early voting, and same day absentee voting, Australia has one interesting electoral quirk that could pave the way for a third party here in the United States.

Since the early 20th century Australia has relied on "preferential voting" (also known as "Instant Run-Off" Voting) to elect members to its lower house of Parliament (where the Prime Minister is chosen). Voters cast their ballots by indicating their first vote for their favored candidate and then numbering the remaining candidates in the order of their "preference". If no candidate receives 50%+ of the vote, the ballots from the candidate who received the fewest votes are distributed to the remaining candidates and their voters' second preferences are tallied. This continues until one candidate achieves 50%+.

According to an article by Mungo MacCallum, Australia's preferential voting system was a direct response to the rise of a third party on the conservative side that handed victory to Labor Party candidates under the "first-past-the-post" system in play at the time. By implementing a preferential system, the "third party" was still able to draw votes, but without significantly damaging the prospects of either right leaning party (otherwise leading to the victory of their left leaning opponents).

Could 'preferential' voting help a third party establish in the US without handing victory after victory to their ideological opponents as the new party gains its foothold? The United States has adopted Australian electoral procedures before, including the "Australian Ballot" or secret ballot voting. Why not preferential voting? I am certainly no constitutional law expert but there are examples of "preferential" voting (Instant Run-Off voting) here in the US, including a mayoral election in Vermont. Also, many US states have different rules for electing federal representatives - such as Louisiana that requires a "Run-Off" election to be held if no candidate receives 50%+ of the vote.

Which system would you prefer?

A few years ago I set my heart on marketing as my chosen major at the University of Delaware- I liked the fast-paced and cutting edge feeling I got from studying it. I then spent a few weeks of the summer with my grandparents- where I raved about UD’s marketing program to my grandmother, citing the unique and exciting courses I took. My grandma was a marketing student as well and set me on my heels when she informed me that sixty years ago, they had the same exact curriculum (however, sans computer classes).

I, and my grandma, were both required to take accounting, micro and macro economics, statistics, calculus, and communication classes. We also were taught the same four P’s of marketing- product, price, promotion, and place. It was a lesson in itself to really see how what we do and learn in this field has kept its structure for half a century.

It made me realize the vast history of the marketing industry- the many years it has been a vital presence, the variety and number of people employed by it, and how the basics stay the same though our audience, and tools to reach them, have grown in both volume and intelligence. This knowledge made me feel so connected to the industry I had only read about, that I fell in love with my major all over again.

Yesterday I had the special honor of representing Beekeeper Group and accepting an Award at the White House as the winner of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Cybersecurity Awareness Challenge.  The event featured remarks by President Obama, Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, and Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano. 

We teamed up with LegalNet Works, a leading provider of cybersecurity program management and education services to federal government agencies, to produce the winning proposal.   LegalNet provided their institutional knowledge and cybersecurity expertise.  Beekeeper Group added the strategic communications and creative public awareness components.

With more than 80 proposals received, our entry beat out those from some of the largest and well-known government contractors and public relations firms.  It is especially gratifying to be named the “most creative” entry against so many respected firms.  This is a great example of two talented firms combining resources to compete and win against some of the biggest names in our industry.

We are delighted to get the opportunity to work with DHS to implement the strategies outlined in our proposal and to help raise public awareness about cybersecurity.