Business Lesson 3
A company has designed a new website and they are looking to go public with it soon. A couple of members of the marketing team meet to discuss the new logo and white paper for the website in order to improve the corporate image.
Jack: The director isn’t too happy about the new design. We need to go back and try something that is more fun.
Carla: What exactly does he want?
Jack: David sent some examples of logos. He is looking for something less corporate looking.
Carla: I like this one. It is clear and informative. We could play with the colours and brighten it up a little.
Jack: From a PR perspective, we have to have something to show soon. We should take one more run at it and aim for something a little more creative and fun. Not too much, fun but still professional.
Carla: We should have some new ideas for tomorrow.
Jack: Great. Now, how are we getting along with the white paper?
Carla: The programming model section is much improved. It is quite well written.
Jack: I agree, but who is the target audience. It might be too technical in parts.
Carla: It is primarily aimed at IT executives trying to understand our company and encourage an approach to web design strategies. However, we also want press and analysts to understand why we are here.
Jack: Perhaps we need to write a second white paper that is more market orientated.
Carla: Do we need to write two white papers or can we just write one combo white paper?
Jack: I recommend that we write two. The second one should have a more business and user perspective. Although the first paper is our main priority, we should expand on the technical sections and make a strong initial statement.
Carla: Okay. But from a PR perspective we should post sections that we are comfortable with now to maximise on press. This way we can focus on what we need to add to the primary document and start work on the second. Whatever we post initially we can say it is evolving.
Jack: Should we discuss any problems with the platform? We can see what feedback and input we receive and work around it.
Carla: No, I think it would be best to focus on the positives and not highlight problems. We can address any problems on other parts of the website, initiate forums and discuss how to get around any issues.
Jack: That’s good. But I’m still interested in feedback. Are we going to publish to a wider audience?
Carla: I was thinking of notifying the member organisations and set a date for publishing to encourage a swift response. Say, in two weeks time?
Jack: Good idea. We are at a critical point. The white paper, mission statement, launch of website. Even a brief summary would be good for now.
Carla: Okay. So I propose that we send it out to all members, give them a chance to review it and a two week deadline on the feedback. We’ll publish after the next meeting.
Jack: Keep me updated on the progress. In the meantime we can focus on the logo. Same time tomorrow to discuss the corporate image?
Carla: Of course.
the new design
from a PR perspective
the programming model section
an approach (to)
Web design strategies
our main priority
the technical sections
a wider audience
a swift response
a mission statement
to go public
to brighten it up
to have something to show
to aim for something
How are we getting along?
It is primarily aimed at…
to expand on
to highlight problems
to address problems
to get around issues
Are we going to publish?
to set a date
to send it out
to keep me updated
Same time tomorrow?
Be the first to comment