All employees must ‘toot their own horn’ if they want a promotion or payrise, but women are particularly timid about doing so, according to an expert in sales psychology.

US-based behavioral scientist Shannon L. Goodson says the fear of self promotion is holding back competent and deserving workers from being recognized for their contributions and prohibiting them from earning what they’re worth.

She says ‘the fear of self-promotion can make you invisible in the workplace’, and workers who believe they can advance their careers without self-promotion are ‘dreamers’.

These people have ‘innocent expectations’ and ‘romantic idealities’ around their careers, she says. Read more »

For sports apparel brands, the Olympics are arguably the most important stage for marketing. So how did the sports marketers fare with the Chinese market in these Olympics? Here’s a look at how things played out for Adidas, Li-Ning, Nike, Puma and Speedo.

Adidas

Adidas reportedly shelled out 70 million euros to be an official Olympic sponsor. Adidas gear was also all over Olympians, great for television exposure. But aside from shoes and uniforms, Adidas wasn’t particularly visible in Olympic venues. It had no special presence on the Olympic Green, but its beautiful flagship store in Sanlitun near the Workers’ Stadium and Workers’ Gymnasium saw lots of foot traffic.

Its Olympic ad campaign, though beautifully designed and fitting in concept (”Together in 2008, Impossible is Nothing”), came up short in the personnel categories. That campaign had four primary faces, in sports that are very popular in China–diver Hu Jia, footballer Zheng Zhi, basketball player Sui Feifei and a few women’s volleyball players. Hu pulled out due to injury, Zheng and the men’s football team had an embarrassing performance and Sui Feifei was only sixth in scoring on Team China. The women’s volleyball team played strong in a very tough field, but in the end only came through with the minimum result acceptable to the hometown fans, a bronze medal.

Li Ning

China’s biggest sports apparel brand had the biggest marketing coup of the games—its founder, Li Ning, carrying the Olympic flame on a three-minute slow-motion run to the top of the Bird’s Nest, where he lit the Olympic cauldron. The company’s stock went up the next day, and Li Ning will always have his stamp on what seems to be an especially important part of the Olympics to Chinese fans.

Li Ning also had its name on the uniforms of China’s diving and table tennis teams, who delivered dominant performances, as well as the Spanish men’s national basketball team, which gave Team USA a tough match before losing in the gold medal game.

Nike
Nike’s two biggest bets on Chinese athletes were Yi Jianlian and Liu Xiang. Yi was solid but not explosive, averaging 9 points a game. The Chinese national team, wearing Nike jerseys, didn’t really exceed expectations, but certainly didn’t come up short, making it to the quarterfinals before losing to Lithuania. But Chinese fans were more excited about catching a glimpse of Team USA, who were also sporting Nike’s hot new jersey, available in stores all over Beijing.

Nike had to deal with the toughest spin job of any Olympic marketer this year—how to salvage its investment in China’s biggest sports star, Liu Xiang, when he didn’t even compete in the games. Nike’s immediate answer–a full-page ad celebrating the love of sport even in defeat–succeeded in becoming part of the stream of catharsis after Liu bowed out. But Nike got some negative publicity for its efforts to hunt down netizens who alleged that the shoe company had coerced Liu to drop out rather than lose to Robles.

Liu and Yi weren’t the only athletes that Nike put is name behind. It was all over China’s teams, and ready with full-page ads in China Daily and front-page ads in Titan sports news when any of its athletes won a medal or had a strong performance. Swimmer Zhang Lin (silver medalist), boxer Zou Shiming (gold medalist) and beach volleyball duo Tian Jia and Wang Fei (silver medalists) were just a few of the lower-profile high-achieving athletes that Nike celebrated in its Olympic campaign.

Puma
Dollar for dollar, Puma might have gotten the most of its Olympic investment. Its hopes ran on two spiked shoes– those of sprinter Usain Bolt, who loped across the finish line to set the 100-meter dash world record. China loves a winner, and Bolt and the dominant Jamaican team were very well-received in Beijing. Jacques Rogge can complain all he wants, but most Chinese don’t mind a guy who’s willing to revel in his moment.

Speedo

If you weren’t wearing a Speedo LZR Racer in this Olympics, you might as well never leave the Water Cube’s warm-up pool. Nine out of every 10 swimming gold medals went to LZR wearers. The only complaint that people had about the LZR was that it made swimmers too fast, world records too common. The suit was considered such an integral part of success that Nike agreed to let its swimmers wear LZRs instead of Nike suits. Speedo doesn’t have a big presence at Chinese sports retailers—swimwear here tends to be generic instead of branded—but China, along with the rest of the world, has no choice but to see Speedo as the leader in swimwear technology.

For more China sports news, check out China Sports Today.

The focus of the Federal Reserve’s upcoming policy meeting once again turns not on what the Fed does with interest rates but rather what officials say about the economic and inflation outlook.

The language policymakers use, as well as any sign of disagreement among Fed members, could settle lingering questions in financial markets about whether the Fed lays the groundwork for rate increases later this year or instead confirms the growing view that rate hikes are unlikely before 2009.

At Tuesday’s meeting, officials are widely expected to hold the target federal-funds rate at which banks lend money to each other unchanged at 2% for a second-straight time, putting greater focus on the accompanying statement.

In its last policy statement June 25, officials signaled that higher inflation matched, or even exceeded, weak growth as their top concern. “Although downside risks to growth remain, they appear to have diminished somewhat, and the upside risks to inflation and inflation expectations have increased,” the Fed said.

While futures markets still priced in roughly even odds of an October rate increase even after the jobless-rate increase, Fed watchers increasingly see officials on hold into 2009. That view gained traction following a decision Wednesday by the Fed to extend loans to investment banks through January. That program was originally scheduled to expire in September.

Fed officials “would not have done what they did if they hadn’t recognized that there’s still a lot of fragility in financial markets,” said Lyle Gramley, a former Fed governor now with the Stanford Group.

Next week’s meeting will also reveal whether a supposed split between the Washington-based Board of Governors and several regional banks is real or rhetorical.

The FOMC voted 9-1 to hold rates steady in June. But Fed watchers thought the lone dissent — by Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher – masked greater division. The Board of Governors — there are five now, seven at full strength — have voted in lockstep for many years. But since most regional presidents only vote once every three years, the preference of many officials isn’t known.

But in June, directors at the Kansas City Fed joined Dallas in requesting a quarter-point increase in the discount rate the Fed charges commercial and investment banks for direct loans, suggesting Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig may have dissented if he had a vote this year. Some Fed watchers assume Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker would also dissent if he could, since he ended his last spell as a voter in 2006 with four-straight dissents in favor of higher rates.

Among this year’s FOMC voters, analysts are eyeing Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser – a past dissenter — and Minneapolis Fed President Gary Stern, whose more than two decades as bank president make him the longest-serving Fed policymaker.

The Fed may need to increase “sooner rather than later,” Plosser said recently. Stern also talked tough on inflation since the June meeting.

If there’s only one dissent again, “it would suggest that the [anti-inflation] hawks were really trying to talk down inflation expectations but don’t have enough of a disagreement with policy” to actually cast a dissenting vote, said Lehman Brothers economist Zach Pandl.

“The hawks have lost a little bit of their ammunition with the decline in oil prices,” Gramley said. Gramley expects Fisher to again be the lone dissenter on Tuesday. –Brian Blackstone

Economists and others weigh in on the decline in U.S. payrolls and the increase in the unemployment rate.

Compiled by Phil Izzo

Offer your reactions in the comments section.

Dig into an interactive summary of economists’ forecasts for the coming year from the latest WSJ.com survey.

What are your suggestions for assessing the capabilities of the U.S. Presidential candidates?

The current Presidential primary season has dramatically illustrated the unrealistic expectations that are being placed upon today’s political leaders.

For a second, let’s assume that the three remaining major candidates for President are basically good people, who want to do what they believe is right for our country. Let’s assume that all are intelligent and have no desire to gratuitously offend voters.

Not only are all of their words being scrutinized for the slightest hint of bad intent or stupidity, the words of all their supporters are also being scrutinized. Any deviation from politically correct responses (from either the candidates or their supporters) are being used to indicate that the candidates may well be closet racists or sexists. Any lack of knowledge in answering questions is leaped on to indicate that they may well be incompetents.

No wonder Americans have such a low opinion of political leaders at all levels. Almost no human looks good when being constantly viewed under a microscope.

Our 24/7 press coverage has created an environment where a new story is needed every day. If a substantive story is not available, a trivial story is used to fill up the space. The amount of time spent and the emotional tone of reporters is almost always the same – regardless of the degree of importance of what is being said. America has serious challenges. We need to focus on what really matters to our country – not the latest slip up by a candidate.

My intent is not to use this blog to promote any political candidate. My intent it to help you assess these future leaders and choose the one that you believe can best help our country.
My suggestions for you – as a voter:

• Ignore word games that are being used to trap all three candidates.
• Accept the fact that all three have supporters who may say and do crazy things.
• Assume that all three are decent, intelligent people who want to do what is right for our country.
• Analyze the most significant challenges that will face our country over the next four years.
• Listen to each candidates plan to meet these challenges.
• Choose the candidate that you believe will do the best job.
• Don’t feel a need to crucify the other candidates to prove that yours is superior.

As always, I would love to hear your suggestions for voters in the upcoming U.S. Presidential election. Comments and reflections from readers outside the States are especially welcome!

Have a question you’d like to me to address? You can submit it by either adding a comment to this post or by e-mailing it to askthecoach@hbsp.harvard.edu

Read all of Marshall Goldsmith’s Ask the Coach posts

Last month, Boeing stock went wobbly on news that test flights and initial deliveries of the Dreamliner would be delayed. Apple’s stock, although it rebounded after a strong earnings report, dropped six percent when the company announced a $200 price cut on the iPhone only eight weeks after the product launched.

CEOs, often dismissive of marketing, are discovering a dangerous reality: aggressive marketing and brand-building can boost stock prices by raising customer and investor expectations. But the penalties for not delivering on marketing promises are fast becoming as significant as not meeting quarterly earnings targets.

Boeing had banked over 700 orders from 50 plus airlines when a prototype 787 was showcased to the public from behind the hangar doors on July 8, 2007. Boeing marketers had done a terrific job of positioning the Dreamliner as a step change improvement in air travel, all but blocking out news around the rival Airbus 380.

Slight problem: the 787 was already behind on its production schedule, with multiple parts suppliers falling short of their delivery targets. Should Boeing have backed off its much-hyped coming out party? Perhaps not. New airliners have typically experienced production delays (the Airbus 380 is two years behind schedule) and customers know this when they place their orders. They will simply operate their existing 747s and 777s a little longer. In addition, no airline manufacturer ever wants to be seen to be compromising safety by rushing a project.
And the delay to the 787 is not likely to give the equally-hyped (and delayed) Airbus 380 any competitive advantage.

The story at Apple is less benign and that explains why the stock was hammered harder. The iPhone was heavily promoted at the time of its June 29 launch, resulting in long lines and spot shortages at Apple and AT&T retail stores. Despite a retail price over $500, iPhones were quickly being offered on eBay for $100 extra.

Two problems then arose: First, the reviews were mixed. At that retail price and with that level of hype, the critics were going to be tough but a raft of concerns from delayed activation and sluggish email (AT&T’s responsibility as the exclusive network provider) to feature shortfalls began to dampen marketplace enthusiasm.

The hype had brought forward demand from the Apple afficionistas who love all things Apple. But these loyal customers were the very ones caught short when Apple announced a $200 iPhone price decrease eight weeks after launch. This suggested iPhone sales had slowed considerably below post-launch expectations and might not meet holiday season targets. The stock price was punished immediately.

More significant perhaps is the possible damage to Apple brand equity among its core customers. After heavy blogging complaints about Apple exploiting its loyal followers, Steve Jobs had to apologize publicly (after his curt “That’s technology” response fueled the fire) and volunteer rebates of half the price difference to those who had already bought the iPhone.

The moral of the story: Do not risk marketing hype unless you are sure of both your supply curve and your demand curve. Hype can hurt stock prices and investor confidence when expectations are not met.

Read more of John Quelch’s Marketing KnowHow blog

MORE ON PRODUCT MARKETING:
Authenticity: What Consumers Really Want (Hardcover)
Preparing for the Perfect Product Launch (HBR Article)
Harvard Business Review Management Dilemmas: When Marketing Becomes a Minefield (Paperback)

99% of marketing focuses on how to sell to customers. Very little attention is paid to why and how customers should sell themselves to marketers. As a customer, do you ever think about how you can get a leg up on your competition–the other customers competing for the attention and goodwill of the seller?

We all know that not all customers are treated equal. Big customers get better treatment than small ones. Frequent customers get better treatment than occasional customers. Most of us recognize – and accept – such discrimination.

But how can you punch above your weight as a customer to get better treatment than your importance to the seller deserves? How-to books targeting customers often focus on how to game the system, how to return the cocktail dress on Monday after you’ve worn it once on Saturday, how to exploit manufacturer warranties and satisfaction guarantees (often, ironically, at the expense of other consumers), how to pay late or not at all.

Here are five behaviors that, in the eyes of vendors, make for a good customer:

Be Demanding. Make sure the vendor knows you have other options, that you’re going to seek out more than one bid. Ask for references, a good supplier will be glad to provide them. Don’t be afraid to negotiate and pin the vendor down, but don’t overdo it.

Be Respectful. If you want your vendor to do a good job, respect him (or her). Treat him as a professional. Don’t be haughty. Be on time. Ask his opinion. The golden rule applies to customer behavior as well as vendor behavior.

Be Reliable. Do what you say you’ll do. Don’t keep the salesperson waiting if she’s come to your office for an appointment. Pay on time. Don’t try to nickel and dime the seller. Don’t ask for free value added services that weren’t part of the original deal.

Be Surprising. Reward a job well done. Leave a tip. Pay a little over the contract price if the seller’s costs clearly exceed expectations or promise to refer the supplier to a friend. You may want to do business with the same supplier again (Why waste time on selecting another vendor from scratch?). You’re going to enjoy more timely and more customized service next time if you leave a good impression.

Be Engaging. Differentiate yourself as a customer by engaging the seller in some friendly conversation. You may get an extra shot of whipped cream in your café mocha if you’re nice to the barista. Treat the seller as an equal, as a problem solver rather than a mere order taker. The seller may be able to confirm or broaden your perspective. In some cases, you may even have expertise that can help the seller do a better job for you.

Obviously, when demand exceeds supply, customers know they’re going to have to get in line, perhaps pay more than list price or wait longer than usual for service. The marketer has to choose which customers get priority – and good customers are going to be higher up the pecking order. What’s your experience? Are there additional behaviors you think make you a more valuable customer in the eyes of vendors?

Read all of John Quelch’s Marketing KnowHow posts

HARVARD BUSINESS ONLINE RECOMMENDS:
Leadership Brand: Developing Customer-Focused Leaders to Drive and Build Lasting Value (Hardcover)
Understanding Customer Experience (HBR Article)
Connecting With Your Customers: The Results-Driven Manager Series (Paperback)
Customer Value Propositions in Business Markets (HBR Article)

As the British nineteenth century commentator John Ruskin astutely observed: “Great nations write their autobiographies in three manuscripts: the book of their deeds, the book of their words and the book of their art.” China has a long and proud history and a rich culture. In deeds, today’s Chinese businesspeople and government officials can do better.

Clearly, China has come a long way during the past decade. Its double digit economic growth rates - especially for a country of over a billion people - have been enviable. China has become factory to the world. The Chinese are rightly proud of their achievements and the 2008 Olympics promise to be China’s coming out party, much as the 1992 Barcelona Olympics helped Spain present itself to the world as a modern, up-and-coming member of the European Union.

However, a series of recent setbacks threaten China’s new and improving image. As a result, China looks like a country that loves the world’s markets but does not play by the world’s rules. China is hardly alone in these behaviors, but its size as the third largest economy in the world now commands attention - and the expectation of better behavior.

Not until recently has China’s government given serious attention to the country’s international image. Though the numbers of tourists and foreign investors grows apace, there is just not enough preexisting brand equity among the world’s consumers to inoculate Brand China against the current tide of negative publicity.

What should China do?

First, the central government must insure that manufacturing quality standards and health and safety laws are tightened and enforced nationwide. Western multinationals have a role to play in insuring their Chinese subcontractors deliver on quality but Beijing must push provincial governments to upgrade and enforce existing laws. Tough sentences no doubt send a message of deterrence.

Second, China must move towards an economy based on invention rather than imitation. Japan and Korea have made the transition. Brands like Sony and Samsung are now respected worldwide. The global aspirations of cutting edge Chinese brands like Lenovo and Haier suffer when the misbehaviors of corrupt Chinese businessmen and government officials drag China’s image down. Pretty soon, China will be exporting cars. Cars are a benchmark product that consumers worldwide will use to assess Chinese production quality across the board. The cars China exports better be as good as Hyundais and Toyotas.

Third, China must use the Olympics as an event for national progress, not just Beijing progress. To spread the modernizing impact of the Olympics, China is rightly planning to hold many Olympic events outside Beijing. It is vital that, for 2008, all Chinese raise their game, not just in competitive sport but in commerce. It would be too bad if China is the largest medal winner in 2008 but remains an also-ran in business practices.

Do you think China will succeed in its effort to rehabilitate its brand?

HARVARD BUSINESS ONLINE RECOMMENDS:
The Battle for China’s Good-Enough Market (HBR Article)
Lenovo: Building a Global Brand (Case)
Doing Business in China (HBR Article Collection)