There has been and will continue to be a lot of hype and, frankly, fear-mongering by some less scrupulous vendors. Basically, their pitch goes like this:

 “Pay us to register www.yourcompany.xxx to protect your brand and good name. If you don’t, well, you never know when someone might create a porn site under your name. Act now! Every day you wait is a day you are at risk.”

Although technically true, this type of implied threat comes dangerously close to “internet blackmail” in our view.

Let’s look at the facts:

• .XXX is the newest of nearly 400 active top level domains.
• .XXX was created to make it easier for individuals seeking adult entertainment online to find it, and those who are not interested in such material to avoid it.
• Like all TLDs, anyone can register “somename.xxx”.  This includes both legitimate use (i.e., “hotporn.xxx”) and cyber-squatters (i.e., “yourbusinessname.xxx”).
• Cyber-squatting is a contentious business practice, whether it involves XXX or not.
• The policies, laws, and regulations governing cyber-squatting are complex, vary from country to country, and are an active battleground in the courts. If you are interested in the gory details, http://www.caslon.com.au/domainsprofile13.htm provides a good jumping-off point.
• In the U.S. and many countries around the world, you can request arbitration under ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). Compared to litigation in U.S. courts, costs are quite low. However, remedies are limited to transfer (from loser to winner) of the domain name, or outright cancellation of the “squatted” domain.
• In the U.S., you can file suit against cyber-squatters under the Federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) of 1999. ACPA provides for statutory damages up to $100,000 per domain name, or actual damages and profits, plus court costs and legal fees.
• Perhaps because of the enormous global value of the adult entertainment industry (some estimates suggest that $3,000 – $5,000 per SECOND is spent on porn worldwide), domain name registrars are charging premium prices for .XXX domains. For example, a 5 year registration of www.johnsrepairshop.com retails for $114.95 ($23/year) at Network Solutions, but www.johnsrepairshop.xxx retails for $649.95 ($123/yr) for the same 5 year term.

Should YOU register a .XXX?

It depends:

• Is it likely that someone would want to operate a legitimate adult entertainment website with the same name as your brand or company? For example, www.realestatenashville.xxx is an unlikely choice for a porn site, whereas www.BestSkinUS.xxx might be more at risk.
• Do you think that squatters might want to target your brand or company with the intent of selling it back to you (“ransom”)? Clearly, you’d be a greater risk if you have a global brand and deep pockets, like Coke or Apple. Is there a personal or political reason someone might target your brand or company for financial gain: www.joesmithforgovernor.xxx, or www.yourcompanynamesucks.xxx ?
• If your customers stumbled upon www.yourcompany.xxx, is there a meaningful risk they’d believe that you operate a porn site as a sideline business? Aren’t they more likely to realize that the overlap is coincidental or that someone is trying to take advantage of you?
• When looking at search results, are prospects likely to get the wrong impression or make the wrong choice if they see listings for both www.yourcompany.com and www.yourcompany.xxx listed? Or are they more likely to choose the .COM link and move on?
• If you found that someone had registered your company or brand name as a .XXX site, would you be willing and able to commit the resources required to litigate? Would you have time and resources available for arbitration?
• How effective is your current domain name registration position? Could you benefit more by adding registrations under .INFO, .BIZ, and .CO (for less money) than under .XXX?
• How well does you current site perform in SEO rankings? Is your content fresh and authoritative? Would legitimate search results overwhelm whatever www.yourcompany.xxx links that might exist? Remember, the best defense is a good offense.

These questions should be considered as a part of your overall strategy for establishing, promoting and maintaining your online brand identity. Domain name coverage beyond www.yourcompany.com can be beneficial, both in terms of brand protection and in link-building; so are Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, FourSquare, and other social media outlets.

We’re happy to discuss your online brand presence at any time, including questions about .XXX. And yes, if you want to lock-down your .XXX, we’re happy to help. But don’t succumb to high-pressure sales tactics or email scare campaigns.

Though the message you see on your screen may seem harmless, the background effects can cause trouble, including the possible elimination of all data on your system.

The most common viruses or threats pose as antivirus software that claim to have detected viruses on your system that need to be removed. Oftentimes, the virus requests that you enter your credit card number to purchase the software.

Though precautions are being taken to place more stringent policies on the firewalls for our customers with engineering services, and making sure the antivirus software has the latest updates and systems are patched with the latest Windows updates, we feel we need to also take more precautions to make sure that how you access the internet is also secured.

What you can do

bytes of knowledge recommends everyone do as much as they can to assist:

1. Practice caution when working with files and/or internet sites from unknown or questionable sources.
2. Do not open email attachments if you do not recognize the sender. (Although you could get viruses via email from those you know).
3. Be sure that link you’re about to click in an email actually goes where you think it should. You can find this by rolling your cursor over the link and taking note of what appears in the bottom of your screen.
4. Download files only from reputable internet sites.
5. Use internet browsers with more security features (see below).

We’ve had effective results with those that switch from using Microsoft Internet Explorer to Mozilla Firefox (www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/new/) with an add-on called “NoScript” (addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript). Many times, it is the scripts that run on the internet pages that allow the viruses entrance in to the system.

The combination of Firefox with NoScript blocks harmful scripts from installing or running in the background of your system if a harmful website is accessed. If the website you access is a trusted site then the scripts needed to access the site will work.

No single application or device can block 100% of viruses and other threats. bytes of knowledge strives to combine the following strategies to ensure reduction of virus/threats to your technology environment so that you can be more productive:

1. More stringent firewall policies
2. Antivirus software and Windows updates are current
3. Internet browsers used offer more security features

For some customers who have Managed Services or have already seen the impact of these viruses/threats this summer, we have already begun to deploy Mozilla Firefox with the NoScript add-on.

If you would like more information on bytes of knowledge’s services and recommendations to detect, remediate viruses and threats before they affect your network and decrease your productivity, please contact us today: 615.383.9005 or help@bytesofknowledge.com.

When deciding on a career move, it is a good time to stop and assess.  Assess who you are and how your experience has shaped you.  It’s a good time to assess what you are good at and where your skills lie and, most importantly for me, I ask myself “well, who do I want to spend the majority of my waking day with?”.

So when the opportunity arose for me to launch the Communications and Virtual Media division of bytes of knowledge I asked myself all these questions and came up with some interesting discoveries.  So yes, I love my career experience to date – 20 years in Live Television and Communications – it’s been a blast, which means I have pretty much been there, seen it, done it!  I know I find creative solutions to the most challenging of problems and I know I love working with smart people, from entrepreneurs and Fortune 100 Executives to front line staff.  I also know that there is a smarter, better way for businesses to use technology to communicate with their workforce, their customers, their partners and bring everyone together to hear the same message, not at one central location but rather from their desktop, their laptop…nowadays they can fully participate in an event as it is possible for them to be ‘Virtually There’.  I have seen it, created it and delivered it.

So, I know I love what I do and have unique skills to share, and now that I am here at bytes of knowledge, I am really looking forward to working with the client base that spans a variety of industries, from small entrepreneurs to public traded companies, from retail to government.

There’s no doubt the best endorsements come from happy and loyal customers and the customers I spoke with had a common message to share with me – bytes of knowledge, delivers results.  No matter what the request, they can meet all of their technology needs in house; creatively and cost effectively.  Some businesses don’t mind shopping around for several service providers but in this market, most prefer to reduce the need for multiple suppliers, contracts and associated overheads.  Each time they need work done they want to have a solid go-to kind of resource that they know they’ll always get value and great service from.  This resource is bytes of knowledge.  Time is money and once you find value, it makes sense to come back and use it again and again and that’s what made me realize that this was the right move for me.  I was able to be part of a dynamic team, that had a proven track record and a bunch of very happy recurring customers.  They were OK and I would B-OK.

With careful planning and policy guidelines, a company may be able to leverage social media to successfully promote its business and still control the risks found inherently in social website access. Specific strategies, explanations and principles are invaluable to institute the culture shift required to control the risk.  The first step is to add a policy to the employee handbook detailing acceptable use.  Openness about concerns of loss of productivity, overburdening of network resources and potential data loss is essential.  The policy should explain not only the risks, but also how behavior on these sites is a direct reflection of the business and can potentially impact a company’s reputation.

Regarding technology impact, you can institute security measures to reduce the social media footprint on your infrastructure.  Firewalls and Antivirus software are two basic ways to increase security.  For example, you may choose to control or limit access to social websites during peak work hours through firewall configuration.  Or choose to limit access to certain sites based on site content.  Or limit the amount of bandwidth one computer or employee is authorized to use.  Additionally, some firewalls or software can provide more detailed reporting on web activity on a daily, weekly or monthly basis to give you greater visibility.  Many times, employee knowledge of policy and monitoring are a sufficient deterrent to extraneous web activity.  Antivirus software (corporate editions) should also be installed on workstations, laptops and servers to protect the network against viruses or malware sometimes found embedded in social media sites.

Social media is currently a playground for marketing professionals.  How many fans your company has on Facebook or how many followers your CEO has on Twitter may indicate the popularity of your business.  Social media can be used for coordinating specific demographic advertising, driving more traffic to the actual business website.  The success of integrating social media into your marketing or promotional portfolio depends on the genuineness of your presence and interactions.  Due to the anonymity of the web experience, many of the users of these sites are not shy about giving you instant feedback about their experiences dealing with your company.  Acknowledging both positive and negative feedback demands finesse and a deliberate, open business strategy embraced by all employees engaged in the social media space.

bytes of knowledge has the experience and the know-how to help you explore and navigate the social media landscape.  From the marketing or promotional aspects to technology operations, we can be your Lewis and Clark (or whomever was a wild, wild west leader!).

One of the most surprising things I heard – and it came up in every discussion group in which I participated – was the idea that if you really wanted to take “take your training to the next level” you had to “step up to” Flash. Interestingly, this sort of statement was always followed by, “but Flash is so hard to learn.”

A coworker of mine also attended this event but spent her time participating in the other discussion groups. When we later compared notes, she said that the other groups spent a lot of time talking about how easy those tools were to learn. But, sooner or later, someone asked how to implement such and such a feature or interaction using the tools and the speaker would say, “Well, you’ll have to use Flash to do something like that.”

Does that mean the Flash is the best eLearning development tool? No, it’s not. We use Flash because it is what we have that can (with enough programming) do the job we need it to do. The learning curve was steep, and we have hundreds (if not thousands) of R&D hours invested in our current Flash + ActionScript production platform.

We had to make that investment because we’d be unable to meet our client’s functional requirements (especially Section 508 accessibility support) without an object oriented programming language under the hood. But, we also recognized that it would be cost-prohibitive if we had to program the function of a “Next” button from scratch for each customer. So, in effect, we’ve built our own tools – based on Flash – in an attempt to combine the rapid development characteristics of other tools with the power and flexibility of Flash.

While it’s tempting to say “Hooray, Us!” for tackling this challenge, the reality is that we only did so because we had to. We had to because companies in the web, multimedia, and eLearning tool business are not creating the kinds of tools that we ALL need. Why should you, or I, have to trade ease of use for power? Or rapid prototyping for source code control? Or … well, any other trade-off you’ve faced.

When the Internet “took off”, tool developers looked at the opportunities and selected eCommerce as their target. Middleware, business objects, n-tier architectures, and more were introduced, refined and have rapidly matured in the market place. eLearning tools – not so much. Of course, there were good business reasons why things took this course, and I’m not arguing things should have gone otherwise. I am suggesting there is a huge, untapped market opportunity for a suite of eLearning content development tools that have a short learning curve to get started, that support rapid prototyping in a team environment, AND that have an underlying technical architecture that allows programmers to implement anything their instructional designers can imagine.

Will HTML5 be the platform on which these tools will arrive? Absolutely, positively, maybe.

I’d like to hear from you. What sorts of trade-offs to you find yourself making between the content you want and the tools you’d need to author the content? Are you thinking about “stepping up” to Flash, or are other tools meeting your needs?

Like all layer cakes, this one must be built one layer at a time. Each higher layer rests on those below it.

Layer 1 – Function: the mechanisms used to find the training, open the training, navigate through the training, track progress within the training, and pause, play, interrupt, restart and exit the training must work without error. A website, search engine or LMS must make it easy for me to find and open the training. If there is a “Menu” button, it must always navigate to a menu page. The “Next Page” button must do what it says it does. If I exit the training and return, it should remember who I am and what material I’ve seen. Get layer one correct and you are in the game; miss, and nothing else matters.

Layer 2 – Accuracy: the content presented in the training must be correct. This isn’t just about getting your facts and figures right. If you are teaching problem-solving, build plausible scenarios that match the learner’s work environment. If you are teaching skills, weave best practices into the mix to explain why a task is best done a particular way. And don’t miss the importance of accurately presenting and reinforcing the attitudes and beliefs that you want the learner to hold about your company, your brand, and your products.

Layer 3 – Engagement: use a variety of media (text, graphics, sounds, video, animation, …) to present your content, as different individuals learn best in different ways. Incorporate interactive elements that require response from the learner so that they don’t have a chance to “zone out.” Use appropriate repetition to reinforce recall and stimulate synthesis.

Layer 4 – Effectiveness: measure the knowledge, skills or attitudes of the learner before taking the training, and then again after taking the training. Compare the two results. What, if anything, changed? Were the changes positive? If you don’t want to or can’t pre- and post-test everyone, use a focus group or do some statistical sampling.

Layer 5 – Retention: everyone has had the experience of cramming for a test and, the following day, forgetting everything again. Short term improvements, measured in Layer 4, are a good start. But what’s needed for real success is long-term retention. Again, sampling is fine but check to see what happens one week, one month and one year after the training was completed.

Layer 6 – Alignment: successful training does more than teach someone something new. It teaches them something useful. Depending on your organization, your competitive landscape, and market maturity, “useful” may take many forms – revenue creation, customer satisfaction, competitive differentiation, investor confidence, and so on. In my view, you can capture the essence of “useful” (in all of its forms) in the phrase “aligned with business goals.” Successful learning is aligned with, and fosters the accomplishment of, business goals.

Layer 7 – Impact: the most valuable measure of success would be one that could convert qualitative measures of alignment into quantitative measures of achievement. It’s fine to say that this eLearning project is designed to improve product knowledge in the sales force. It’s better to say that revenues went up 15% in the quarter following training deployment. But it would be best of all to say that revenues went up 15% because of the training.

Will I Get My Money’s Worth?

If, by asking this question, one means “is there a quantitative measure of value creation that depends solely on the impact of this specific training effort?” I’d have to say “sorry, no.” We are complex, sometimes irrational, human beings living and working in a complex, often chaotic, world. Tracing cause and effect with that degree of precision simply isn’t possible.

However, if one means “can I take concrete steps to define, test, and evaluate training investments as they relate to my company’s business objectives?” the answer is a resounding “YES!”

That’s my view. What’s yours?

Yes, it is a fair question. And, on the surface, it seems simple enough. Suppose, for example, that I do not know how to use the red-eye correction on my new digital camera (perhaps I don’t even know the feature exists). If could learn to use red-eye correction by taking an eLearning course online, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the training was successful, right?

But what if there is more to the story? Perhaps, I am disappointed with the family photos I’ve taken with my new camera because everyone seems to have “devil eyes.” My friend, who has a different brand of digital camera, tells me that she never has any problem with this. I take a look at her Facebook album and – sure enough – her photos look great! At this point I’m a frustrated and unhappy customer. And I’m a customer who may be wishing that I bought a different product.

Now – would a “How To Use Red-Eye Correction” eLearning module turn me back into a happy customer? A customer who is not only capable of eliminating red-eye, but is also confident in the buying decision I made, and ready to recommend my camera to others? Frankly, I doubt it.

“Will I get my money’s worth?” If I’m the digital camera manufacturer, I might think of red-eye correction as just one more checklist item needed for the inevitable side-by-side comparisons with my competitors. As such, I might see little value in creating eLearning for the new model. And, with little perceived value to gain, the question of value for my training dollar might never be raised. But, throw in an unhappy customer or maybe a whole bunch of unhappy customers. Well that could be different.

My example is somewhat contrived, but I hope that it illustrates my point. “Successful eLearning,” which it surely must be if I am to conclude that it was worth the development cost, is not nearly so simply a concept as we wish it might be. And if “success” is difficult to predict and/or measure, surely a precise, quantitative measure of “return on investment” must be even harder to come by.

So what does one do? Give up? Move forward with eLearning development projects as an act of faith? Conclude that training is little more than a black hole for resources? Absolutely not.

Next time, I’ll give you my “seven-layer cake” recipe for defining, creating, and measuring successful eLearning. In the meantime, I’d like to hear from you. If you’re in the training world, what challenges do you face in getting funding for training development approved? If you are on executive row, how do you evaluate the business worthiness of training projects?

Broadly speaking, physical disabilities can be grouped into three categories: vision, hearing, and mobility. Each category encompasses a variety of impairments and a spectrum of ability; from able, to disabled, and everything in between. For example, while blindness is obviously one type of visual disability, so is color blindness. Loss or paralysis of a limb is mobility disability, but so is loss of fine motor control due to Parkinson’s disease.

For application developers, content creators, and information publishers, providing full access for individuals with physical disabilities is not a trivial endeavor. It adds difficulty to interface design, often requires development of additional media assets, and complicates quality assurance efforts. And that adds up to more time and more expense. So why do it?

In my view, there are four reasons that you should consider taking that extra time and expense to remove obstacles to access. The first, and the most obvious, is if you know that your target audience of information consumers includes individuals with disabilities. This might be the case with internal employee training, for example.

If you supply products and services to the federal government, including our military, the second reason is equally compelling. It’s the law. Section 508 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires that when Federal agencies develop, procure, maintain or use electronic and information technology, Federal employees with disabilities have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access and use by Federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities. Section 508 also requires that individuals with disabilities, who are members of the public seeking information or services from a Federal agency, have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to that provided to the public who are not individuals with disabilities.

The third reason, perhaps, is purely financial. Individuals with some degree of physical impairment or disability represent a significant market segment. This is a market segment with significant purchasing power, composed of millions of individuals that will look either favorably or unfavorably upon your company, your products, and your services. In the United States, for example, nearly 3 million consumers are visually handicapped from color blindness and over 1 million have Parkinson’s disease. Some 36 million American adults report some degree of hearing loss, and more that 100 million Americans are visually disabled without corrective lenses.

This is also growing market segment for two reasons. First, aging boomers are living longer and yet are increasingly affected by a variety of age-related health issues that can impair sight, hearing, and/or mobility. Second, an unprecedented number of young Americans now return from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan with serious injuries that will be with them for the rest of their lives. Ask yourself, “Are there aging boomers in my work force?” and “Are my products and services of potential interest to veterans?” I’d be truly surprised if the answer to both was “no.”

I raise the issue of market opportunity to point out the potential financial rewards of designing for accessibility, and to open discussions of return on investment. I think that one should also consider what the economic impact of preventing a significant segment of the population from participating in the global knowledge economy could be.

Setting all practical, regulatory, and economic arguments aside, my fourth, final and (I believe) most compelling reason to design for accessibility is simply this: it’s the right thing to do. I can’t imagine any ethical or moral basis that could justify creating and maintaining a new community of second class citizens in cyberspace.

Of course there are still hundreds of millions of people world-wide that have no access to the internet at all, much less, broadband access. And that status quo isn’t acceptable either. But if website designers, software programmers, and eLearning authors would start building for accessibility today, we’ll be ready for everyone to participate tomorrow.

Is information accessibility on your mind? Let me know what you think.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m OK with the dictionary definition of “learning” and it does in fact accurately describe what we generally hope to accomplish through an eLearning module. My problem is with the narrow definition of “training” within most organizations, and the direct tie often drawn between training, learning and eLearning. As in “our training division is responsible for all of our learning initiatives,” or “the training budget doesn’t include funds for eLearning.”

This gives me grief on two fronts. First, it’s now almost universally accepted that customer service is everyone’s job regardless of department, role or title. In many organizations, the same is true of sales. Common sense says that every single employee can recognize new opportunities, support your brand, and build customer loyalty… and that they can improve their abilities through proper training and experience. Yet few of us say “learning is everyone’s job.”

If that’s not enough to prompt a “Whoa!” moment, think about this. If globalization has taught us anything, it’s that almost everything can be made a commodity. In today’s world economy, the only sustainable competitive advantage is an ability to adapt and change more quickly than do our competitors. “Adapt” and “change” sound like “learning” to me.

My second concern is with the artificially narrow functional role often assigned to training. For example, both product training and sales skills training can be essential components of a product launch strategy. Too often, however, we see those activities as something done before the launch itself. Do the training, and then do the launch. Separate and definitely not equal.

Here’s my radical idea. Every product, service or communication your organization creates or provides IS training. Advertising is training. Promotional materials are training. Packaging is training. Documentation is training. Press releases are training. Newsletters are training. Blogs are training. Branding is training. Sales calls are training.

Why? Because “training” is an attempt to introduce, reinforce, or modify a fact, attitude, belief or skill in someone else. “Learning” is the set of processes through which that fact, attitude, belief or skill is internalized. Do it better than your competitors and it will be your values, your product, your brand, and your message that wins that valuable real estate in the human mind. Do it poorly and someone else will capture that turf.

Am I advocating the reassignment of all sales and marketing personnel to your training organization? Of course not. But just remember: communicating, persuading, and training are just three sides of the same coin, and learning IS everyone’s job.

What do think? Am I pointing out the obvious, or am I running off the deep end?